<p>(warning: long ****ing post)</p>
<p>So I've compiled together all the testimonies in regards to CC to UCLA from the "Your First Semester Experience at UCs" thread. I've also answered a ****load of questions about Bus Econ in particular in this thread:</p>
<p>So I guess ask all of your CC to UCLA questions in here (academics). I have transfer friends here from a lot of different majors so I guess I have a little bit of insight on them. And any other transfers at UCLA feel free to chime in.</p>
<p>strongergodzilla (History)</p>
<p>the classes were definitely different. i'm a history major and in community college my classes were pretty similar in that they consisted of a few term papers, 6 or 8 multiple choice quizzes, and a midterm and a final, both multiple choice and short response with one long essay response. very "highschool". UCLA on the other hand...</p>
<p>one class required two 5 page papers, one 8 page paper, 1 research based 10 page paper, and two 3 page papers (all of my required page counts include double spacing, for anyone who might wonder?). this was all over a 10 week period, and while at the end it was a little much, it was very doable. the same class also had 6 books to read, mostly historical novels on the period. </p>
<p>another was lecture based, one mid term, one final, all essay, no multiple choice. very "college" stereotype.</p>
<p>my language class was nothing new really, it really depends on the language you take. if its any consolation, im white, took vietnamese, and got an A. its all what you put into it. </p>
<p>experiences may vary. i.e. most of the engineering majors on my floor were usually very preoccupied, but everyone had time to do their own thing. my roommate is chem engineering and he still found time to go to clubs and play video games, etc.</p>
<p>strongergodzilla (History) part 2</p>
<p>I had a 3.4 at CC and i got a 3.567 or something my first quarter here at UCLA. The classes were way different, the time frame much faster but once you adjust to the speed of the quarter system it all kind of falls into place. </p>
<p>For me, its not the studying that takes up my time, its the reading for courses. its seems that generally <em>disclaimer</em>...GENERALLY, north campus majors (english, history, poli sci, psych, philosophy, etc etc etc) have to spend much more time reading rather than studying, because generally, north campus majors have the traditional midterm, few essays and a final and maybe a project or 2. </p>
<p>South campus (science majors, engineering, mathematics, etc etc etc) seem to have much more studying / hw to be done. Problem sets are constantly being assigned, they can have 2 or 3 midterms, quizes, a final, and projects, etc. The people i know in econ are always studying, and Ravatech (sp?) is brutal. Be prepared to have a nervous breakdown.</p>
<p>For me, and most of the people i've met in my classes who are north campus majors, its 2 or maybe 3 hours a day reading, an hour of misc. other class work during the normal weeks. Midterms can be harsh depending on the teacher, a few solid days of pure studying though and you should be ok, again its different person to person. Finals week is similar, just more studying obviously. </p>
<p>I wake up, go to class, get food, come back and nap. start reading, eat dinner, hang out, read more, do assignments, sleep, rinse, repeat. in between I see friends etc, play games, practice guitar, but you get the general idea. some people are slow essay writers, and that can really be a killer as a north campus major. My final for a class this quarter is a 25 page paper, and throughout the quarter quite a few 5 page ones (considered more or less the usual length). If you can get a 5 page paper done in a day or two, you better work on being able to do so, because if you are north campus major, chances are you will see a lot of them.</p>
<p>Newton</p>
<p>even though i did very well academically, i must say that there certainly was a difference in academic ability between the sophomores and junior transfers in my classes. the sophomores were aiming for A's while the transfers just wanted to pass.</p>
<p>dhl3 (Business Economics)</p>
<p>UCLA is LOT LOT LOT HARDER THAN CC COURSES.</p>
<p>IF YOU THINK YOU CAN DO AS WELL AT UCLA JUST BECAUSE YOU GOT 4.0 IN CC AND STAYED TOP OF THE CLASS WITH 125% FINAL GRADE, THEN YOU SHOULD RECONSIDER WHAT YOU ARE GOING INTO.</p>
<p>Basically:
At CC: You study hard day and night 3 days in advance of exam, you will most likely to get an A.</p>
<p>At UCLA: You study hard day and night A WEEK in advance of exam, you will most likely get average (B-/C+), or if you are lucky, a B/B+. </p>
<p>Just a warning.</p>
<p>or maybe I just had hard profs.</p>
<p>dhl3 (Business Economics), part 2</p>
<p>Ektaylor, pretty much everyone at UCLA studies like you. As a matter of fact, starting a week before midterm/finals week, you'll definitely see that there are lot less activities going on in the campus, and the library will be full. People literally bring pillows and blankets and live in the library for a full week (well except shower) during the finals week.</p>
<p>The difference between CC and UCLA (and any other UC's i'm sure) is that at CC, you are one of the very few that actually studies that hardcore and you are at advantage compared to other "slackers" or whatever you wanna call. At UC, studying like you is THE NORM. Basically, imagine you competing against yourself, except there are more than 100 (one of my class has 400 people) of you, and the prof. makes curve based on that.</p>
<p>Insamniac (Econ/Intl Area)</p>
<p>It's been a while since I posted here, but I wanted to share my experience as an econ major (one I think contrasts with dhl3's). I'm an Econ/Int'l Area Studies major at UCLA and I would say classes are definitely harder than my CC, but not unreasonably so. I'm kind of a slacker (I'm here to avoid studying for my Econ 101 (Bet you're in that class too, eh dhl3?)) but I got As/Bs last quarter, and look to be getting about the same this quarter. I'm hoping to get an A in Econ 101 (yeah, should probably go finish those study questions), but honestly, at this point, I just want to do decently and finish school, so Bs in weeder classes are acceptable.</p>
<p>Bear in mind, those econ-hopefuls for UCLA: you're in the pre-major for the first one to three quarters (depending on major), and have to get a 2.5 to 3.5 (again, depending on major) to officially declare. But once you're in the major, I believe you only need a 2.0. So, don't worry, take things as they come. It's completely doable (though the 3.5 for Bus Econ majors does seem to be hard--if you can't swing it, do straight econ with an accounting minor). My friend just got an A with Ravedge, or however it's spelled, so it's all doable.</p>
<p>sakura812 (Physiological Science)</p>
<p>My experience at ucla is more similar to dhl3's experience. I had a decent gpa from cc (3.86) and then a 3.1 my first quarter here. I'm a physiological science major here.</p>
<p>One of the many questions that i know people will ask and i asked the same question too back then was whether the classes are a lot harder/impossible. After you transfer you will mainly be taking upper division classes unless you have lower div classes you need to make up. Upper division classes here cannot be compared to the classes you have taken at cc bc those are lower division classes. Upper division classes are in general harder than lower division classes. However, I did make up lower division bio (ls 3 and ls 4) here. What i've noticed is that the material is pretty much the same here compared to cc. But the main difference is the test. The test are harder here. They put more critical thinking questions and make it more harder than necessary in order to test how much you know the stuff. So not only do you need to memorize the stuff but also learn how to apply it. The ls series here are consider weeder classes here, so i advise life science majors to try to complete you bio series before you transfer. It'll make your life a lot easier after you transfer. </p>
<p>Another difference here is that ucla is on the quarter system. I was used to cc's semester system. Bc of that you have to study a lot more and more frequently. Otherwise you'll get behind. Also once midterm starts you basically keep studying all the way til the end of the final. But i actually like the quarter system better because classes end faster. </p>
<p>One of the big difference that i've experience here is the grading and the testing. You are graded on a curve so you are competing against other people. Your grade is based on how well the class does not how well you do. And if your a science major the average is curved to a b-/c+. I think the curve is better for north campus majors. Testing wise, it's a lot more critical thinking and more conceptual and even abstract stuff (like i had a crossword puzzle on my physiology midterm...that was a wth moment). But it does hone your critical thinking skills. Grading wise, the ta's are really picky. If your answer can be used as a key to the test then you get full credit. Otherwise, partial credit. You have to be precise and specific in your short answer/essay questions in order to get full credit. I remember in cc even if i gave a generic answer i still got full credit.</p>
<p>kevin101</p>
<p>In my 2 years at UCLA, it was tough, interesting and competitive but I learn a whole lot on so many different subjects: business (I was lucky to have taken 2 MBA GRADUATE level courses but they were much easier than my upper division math courses so I learn that MBA program is not that difficult as it might sound), accounting and math. I'm very glad that I have finally graduated in this June 2008.</p>
<p>kevin101 (about BioChem)</p>
<p>Bio Chem in UCLA is very tough major... my friend was a 3.9+ GPA from CC and then transferred to UCLA as bio chem studying 12 hours a day and yet still not acing all courses. From what he said, it is a lot of memorization and the exams are crazily difficult due to the crazy amount of materials that you have to digest within a short time. Also, the courses taken at CC doesn't even come close to the major courses at UCLA in term of difficulty.</p>
<p>xleper17 (Philosophy)</p>
<p>I guess this is my "midterm" report, but I feel like this is pretty much the philosophy experience at UCLA and it won't change since we tend to NOT have formal finals.</p>
<p>100's of pages of reading of incredibly dense material is a great way to start this story. It's not like Descartes' "Meditations" or "Leviathan" by Hobbes, it is much more thick and time consuming. I am currently reading Rawls (easy, dry, but long), Frankfurt (easy but long), Frege (crazy and complicated) and Russell's "On Denoting" (i don't even want to talk about it). Everyone quickly learns that if you're stuck reading Plato and Aristotle for a quarter, you have no right to complain, unless you're reading "De Anima" then just suck it up and read about the mules and bees. Reading "The Apology" or any piece of work like that is a blessing in disguise because it's one of the easiest things you'll be reading at UCLA.</p>
<p>I just turned in a paper that is worth 60% of my grade. Bonus to that high percentage is that I have no midterm and no final, I just have two homework assignments (lambda calculus and typed l-c) and participation in class/discussion.</p>
<p>My other phil class is very different and we have many more papers to turn in; no midterm but we do have a final. Also we get marked down if we don't attend class, the upper division philosophy classes tend to be like this. The TA is supposed to keep an eye out and notice if anyone has not attended for some time and they will mark you down for missing discussion. It's impossible to get an 'A' in that class without going to every discussion.</p>
<p>As for the TA's? Not the most helpful people in the world. They will grade and correct your essay within an inch of its metaphorical life, but they may not lead the best sections in the world. I have one TA who is absolutely amazing and deserves to have his own class, but HE WILL NOT REPLY TO E-MAILS. Very irritating, especially when the professor will reply to you within 3 hours and the TA has yet to send back even a "yes" or "no" and it's been a week and a half.</p>
<p>The Professors at UCLA are different from what I expected. These crazy-smart people are really welcoming and patient. As long as you keep in mind that they have something better to do than listen to you whine/stress out. My young professor, was just added to the faculty this year, is incredibly helpful and earnest. It's really cool when you're walking down the hall and you pass David Kaplan!</p>
<p>All in all? I love it here. I'm really glad I picked a school that studies analytic philosophy and am constantly challenged. I have found a new love, Philosophy of Language with emphasis on semantics and semiotics. Speaking of which, it is now time to read.</p>