<p>just out of curiosity, i was just wondering what non-californians think about ucla as far as undergrad goes, and then what they think about ucla overall, in terms of undergrad and its wide range of grad programs.</p>
<p>I'm interested in knowing this as well...</p>
<p>kfc4u, are you gonna start this again? I'm still nursing my battle scars from the last time this subject was posted. If you insist well then lets go! Actualy, I think those one or two silly little kids are gone from CC now. We'll see!</p>
<p>on the east coast, it's ivies or elite lac's. uc's don't get the national respect they deserve.</p>
<p>So to the east coast, would a school like say USC whose below in ranks to UCB and UCLA, have more respect. Also as to Boston University to UCSB, UCSD, UCD, and UCI even though they rank higher than BU?</p>
<p>My son goes to UCSD which is well known in the science related schools and industries all over the Country, but little known otherwise. I think Cal is thought of as a top college/place to do grad work all over, but it has the hippie thing hanging over it. They're sure it's really good but couldn't send a kid who was not counter culture. UCLA is only known for the sports in other parts of the Country. Anderson B School does get respect. Same thing with USC. No one outside of CA knows a thing about the other UCs! Irvine, Davis, huhhhhh?????????? To my partner's in our E. Coast offices, Stanford is the only real CA undergrad choice for their kids. Bolt does get respect. A lot of these guys are from CA and went to Stanford Law School!! I spend a lot of time spouting figures, but.................wanted to hire a UCSD or Cal paralegal recently but there were "top" school kids who wanted the job according to the others.</p>
<p>Kirmun, wow you work with some dumb people. Just kidding. Actually, I have heard from a few reputable sources that there exists much elitism on the east coast that may stem from the historical fact that higher education was primarily for the rich. This mentality has been passed on without much thought as to why. Some people on the east still regard The Ivy League as the few schools that really matter. They see public schools in general as inferior because they have been conditioned to believe this. </p>
<p>Another theory I have come up with myself is that the Ivy League has been great for a long time and people who live in the North East have a hard time accepting change. The country has grown quite a bit in the last few hundred years. Incredible schools have grown to prominence in just about every corner of the US. The Midwest has U of C, Michigan, and Northwestern to name a few. The south can boast Rice, Duke, U of V, and UNC among others. California alone had 5 or 6 world class universities. And why should East Coasters think much about other schools? They have a high concentration of great schools in their back yards which makes it less necessary to recognize other great schools. Every area suffers from regional bias; the east coast and California are no exceptions. It is just easier for those states outside of the North East to recognize the greatness of East Coast schools because we ourselves have been conditioned to recognize East Coast greatness. After all, your grandmother may have moved here from the East and her grandfather may have told her that Princeton (for example) was a great school. In other words, youthfulness plays an important part in institutional recognition as well.</p>
<p>With that said, I have a hard time believing that the East Coast people who REALLY know about schools (e.g. graduate school committees) would fail to recognize the greatness of non-east coast schools. There are great schools all over the country now. The East Coast no longer has a monopoly on higher education. Some people may not recognize this fact but that does not meant that it is any less true.</p>
<p>hey kfc4u I see you went to Rowland HS...I go to Wilson HS =) Anyways, back to the topic...Feels kinda weird to see someone from my area.</p>
<p>Well said, shyboy13.</p>
<p>I've heard of Wilson HS if it's the one in Los Angeles.</p>
<p>Glen A Wilson HS in Hacienda Hts? It's apprx. 25 miles east of downtown LA.</p>
<p>Wilson Mules?</p>
<p>nope...Wildcats. lol</p>
<p>oh hey masterchiefll, yea theres ppl from our area on CC, they just dont put it in their profile! </p>
<p>props to shyboy again!</p>
<p>back to the topic... anyone else? what do you guys think of UCLA?</p>
<p>Do you think if UCLA was less crowded and was a smaller school, UCLA would be more presigious?</p>
<p>Well...Speaking as an NC resident, I have to disagree with the lack of respect for UCLA. People generally agree that UCLA and UC Berkeley are the best schools in California (after Stanford). It really depends...Most southerners agree that Berkeley has a great chemistry department (the best, IMO) and that UCLA has great acting/biology programs. I do think, though, that UC prestige is mostly at the graduate level (in NC, at least). The schools also have a reputation for being overcrowded and underfunded. In addition, Berkeley still has a reputation for being counterculture. Overall, I'd have to say Stanford (and Berkeley, to a lesser extent) eclipses UCLA in terms of reputation in the South.</p>
<p>liek0806, i think if ucla was less crowded (as in more selective), its prestigiousness factor would go up a bit because its so hard to get in, but it seems like many top kids still favor berkeley over ucla. ive also heard ppl say how berkeley and ucla should be more like michigan and virginia and accept more out-of-staters, cuz its hard trying to hold a national reputation when youre mostly only taking applicants from your own state. </p>
<p>warblersrule, thanks for the insight. the pecking order is generally like that in california too, although some people may not agree</p>
<p>UCLA and Berkeley are already very selective. If they were to admit as many people as Harvard (or any other more selective school) they would be even more selective. I mean, they would have a lower acceptance rate.</p>
<p>In fact, if UCLA and UCB were to downsize their admissions to admit the same number of applicants as Harvard, the admit rate would be around 8% or something...</p>
<p>If UCB and UCLA were to downsize their admissions, the number of applications will go down too. So the admit rate would be about the same. If Stanford and Harvard increased freshman enrollment, the number of applications would go up. So I don't why anyone would argue about that.</p>