<p>Yeah I've had friends without TAP that got in with a good GPA, about 3.5 and above. I've almost joined TAP(huge dilemma)but I gave it some second thoughts and decided not to go for it after taking several friends' advice(they went through it and they were great students) on avoiding my school's TAP program.</p>
<p>"UCLA = LOT easier to transfer for CC students"</p>
<p>However, like Colin387 mentioned, overall, USC is just not as selective as UCLA for the tranfer students. Therefore, even though UCLA gives priority to the community colleges, USC is still a LOT easier to transfer into for CC students.</p>
<p>"I dont think so. I visited the counselor of Marshall Business School, and she told me that average GPA for the admitted Business major students was 3.75"</p>
<p>I don't know the average GPA for the admitted Marshall students, but I talked with the USC Viterbi adcom at smc college fair and she told me that the average gpa for the Viterbi admitted students is around 3.4~3.7. Then, I realized that USC is far easier to get into for engineering transfers when it compares with UCLA , considering that UCLA has average gpa of 3.77 for 2005 transfer. </p>
<p>"Saying that getting into USC is easier because their courses are easier is completely ignorant."</p>
<p>I agree, however USC does have a more relax course requirements. Therefore this might still give some students a chance to get in USC if they don't have enough time to finish all the course requirements that UCLA wants. Keep in mind that UCLA cares a lot about the course preparation for transfers.</p>
<p>dhl3 read the rest of my post. I didn't just say if you completed major prep classes and have the 60 units that you're guarenteed in. I said if you do that AND HAVE A HIGH GPA (meaning 3.6+) you're pretty much in. </p>
<p>Here I'll even paste my post again so you can read it..</p>
<p>"Also what's this about you saying taking easy classes with a high gpa for USC won't get you in? If you satisfied the major prep courses, and accumulated 60 units with a high gpa you will get in."</p>
<p>ok then.
Let me apply this fall and see if i get admitted.
According to you, I would have 100% chance of getting in to USC (GPA of 3.71 (actually 3.83 after the Fall Semester) with 74 units completed and all major prep classes done already).</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>How is that ignorant? If school A's preqreq's are easier for one major and school B's prereqs's are harder for the same major, doesn't that mean that school A is easier to get into that major? Here is an example</p>
<p>UCLA Business Econ</p>
<p>Micro Econ
Macro Econ
Calc 1
Calc 2
2nd semester of college writing/lit</p>
<p>USC Marshall</p>
<p>Micro Econ
Macro Econ
Business Calc (only one semester, not even real calculus)
2nd semester of college writing</p>
<p>Ignoring GPA's for each major, just the fact that for USC you only need one semester of "fake" calculus makes it easier to get a higher GPA and therefore have a higher chance of getting in correct?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>What's your major? It all boils down to that remember. However if what you say is true there is no reason for you not to get in. I can't say you're GUARENTEED in because there is always no guarentee (remember I said if you have the pre req's compleated with a high gpa you probably will get in), but you probably most likely will be admitted. I don't see why you wouldn't be.</p>
<p>"If school A's preqreq's are easier for one major and school B's prereqs's are harder for the same major, doesn't that mean that school A is easier to get into that major?"</p>
<p>ok, so you are basing the difficulty level of getting admitted based only on the required courses. If that's your arguement, then UCLA should be one of the easiest college to get into.</p>
<p>Take one example, let's look at UC Santa Cruz (which actually have a GUARANTEED admission program in some Community colleges, meaning if you do that program, you are 100% guaranteed that you'll get in there) Business Administration Economis major:</p>
<p>Micro-Economics
Macro-Economics
Principles of Accounting I
Principles of Accounting II
Calculus I
Calculus II
Calculus III
Intro. to Computer Alogorithm and Programming/JAVA</p>
<p>vs</p>
<p>UCLA Business Economics:</p>
<p>Macroeconomics
Microeconomics
Calculus I
Calculus II
College Writing (2 semesters)</p>
<p>So according to your logic, UC Santa Cruz would be a LOT HARDER school to transfer.</p>
<p>Make sure you reread UCSC's regulations. Sure the major has more prereq's to fulfill, but guess what? You don't need to fulfill all of them by the time of transfer (like LA), nor do you need to fulfill a certain amount (like half of them), I know that major very well there and even if you just took Micro and Macro econ you will get in with the 3.0 guarenteed GPA program... once your in however you'll have to fulfill the rest of the req's. </p>
<p>I just brought up that comparison to show that it's easier to get a higher GPA if you go the USC marshall rought (meaning taking the easy calc class vs 2 semesters of real calc for UCLA). You say the avg gpa for USC Marshall is 3.75... ok i'll take your word for it. But getting that 3.75 GPA going the USC rought is MUCH EASIER than getting the 3.80+ going the UCLA rought (2 semesters of calc). This goes for other majors as well such as engineering.</p>
<p>sorry colin, but it's simple logical flaw you keep presenting again and again:</p>
<p>correlation != causation</p>
<p>just because a different calc class is required in NO way whatsoever can you ever logically argue that it is therefore easier to get into USC. Stop trying to prove anectodally that UCLA is better or easier to get into, just face the fact that both damn schools are better in areas and not so great in other areas. USC attracts some of the best applicants and has higher avg. sat's than UCLA and Cal. However, UCLA has some great engineering programs (USC is usually just right behind it, esp. in electrical engineering) and a fantastic business program.</p>
<p>Cinema & Film:
USC > UCLA</p>
<p>Business adminstiration (undergrad):
USC > UCLA (UCLA doesnt even have Business major)</p>
<p>Accounting:
USC > UCLA (USC's Accounting program ranks 4th in the nation)</p>
<p>Economics:
UCLA > USC</p>
<p>Engineering:
UCLA > USC</p>
<p>for international students, i feel that ucla is better than usc. ucla is known all over the world, especially in asia countries. not to say that usc is not known, but ucla is more famous in asia compared to usc. im international student btw. thats why i know.</p>
<p>im not talking about the major in here btw. just the school overall.</p>
<p>Not to mention USC still has that negative attention to it even though they have improved by a lot. If you go to any other countries, a lot of people will look down them due to the criticism they received in the past. Once people have a view on a certain college, that view will always be there. UCLA tends to be more highly valued due to the prestigious name and history. Not to mention their admission decisions are different than USC. If you don't have the grades, you don't get in. No "privaleged" services for any prospective student because it is a public university.</p>
<p>I'm tired of reading about UCLA vs. USC. I was admitted to UCLA Biz/Econ with a 3.85 transfer gpa with A's in ALL of the pre-reqs and I picked USC Marshall because clearly I would get a more rounded business education @ SC. UCLA Biz/Econ is an ECON degree with a BUSINESS orientation. I don't know WHY the major at UCLA isn't renamed to "Economics w/emphasis on business" because this is clearly the case.</p>
<p>This is the Biz/Econ description from UCLA's website:</p>
<p>The B.A. program offers a major for students seeking a business orientation in their study of economics. It does not replicate the traditional undergraduate business school curriculum. Instead, it offers a more tightly focused curriculum that is guided by the rigorous logic and integrative perspective of economics. It is designed to prepare students for graduate education in business, economics, and law. </p>
<p>So tell me, where would I get a better business education at a UC besides Berkeley Haas which has a 8% acceptance rate for transfer students? USC is the clear winner over UCLA in the realm of business.</p>
<p>hahaha moss, welcome to the darkside.</p>
<p>I saw on the USC website that it has multiple campuses, do undergrads actually go to these places or do the majority of people stay at the one with the Trojan statue?</p>
<p>majority stay on the main campus, i believe the remote campuses are designed for PM MBA students who work further away from the university park campus.</p>
<p>well actually my reply above mostly applies to the orange county usc campus :p</p>
<p>I would pick Marshall over ucla's biz/econ too if I were you. I think you made a good choice, however we were just making a point that Marshall is easier to get into comparing with ucla's biz/econ.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I don't know about you, but do you know how many business majors USC has every year? Everyone at USC is a business major pretty much (it's basically like how everyone at Cal state schools major in business, but it's not quite 50%). UCLA Business Econ is more selective in that they only put out a few hundred graduates per year. Almost everyone I know that comes out of UCLA Biz Econ has great jobs. I know many marshall people that come out and find jobs yes through the network... but even the marshall grads said that big companies favor UCLA grads just cause they know its a more competative program to get into... and the curriculum is much more intense.</p>
<p>If i get into both the BizEcon of UCLA and Business of Marshall..</p>
<p>I'd choose Marshall any day, any time.
BizEcon is basically Economics/Accounting.</p>
<p>I'm looking at the BizEcon curriculum here...
Basically you take 5 REGULAR economic courses (meaning you can take them eve if you are a regular Econ major), only two courses dedicated to BizEcon majors, and 4 management courses (which are actually the same thing as Accounting courses)</p>
<p>Personally, if I were to consider BizEcon, I would just go with Accounting major of USC, which is uncomparably superior over UCLA.</p>