UC Berkeley vs. UCLA

[kyledavid80]

<p>

As a matter of fact, I heard in terms of academics, UCLA is more laid back and relaxed whereas Berkeley tend to be cut-throat competitive among students. This isn’t to say that UCLA is academically easy or anything (trust me on this, it isn’t), but from what I’ve heard, one major major complaint that I hear from Berkeley students is its infamous competition, and I’m sure you’ve heard about it too.

</p>

<p>Rumor. Both can be competitive. Both can be laid back and relaxed. UCLA isn’t so different from Berkeley in this respect.</p>

[Columbia_Student]

<p>

I have been on the quarter system my entire academic career and 3 sets of finals exams sucks. BUT most of all, these professors try to squeeze in 15 WEEKS OF WORK IN 10 WEEKS!!! Why? Because most of them went to semester schools and they do not know the difference between semesters and quarters in terms of organizing course syllabi. Sure you get more variety but you get a must shallower education in more courses.

</p>

<p>Agree. I have been on both systems, the quarter system is definitely a lot more work. More books to buy as well.</p>

[bluebayou]

<p>disagree with quarter-bashers. It is just plain illogical that a quarter system is “more work.” Is UCLA (qtr) more work than Cal (semester)? Is Stanford (qtr) more work than Harvard (semester)? Did Cal’s “work” miraculously become ‘easier’ when they switched to the semester system ~15 years ago?</p>

<p>Frosh Chem is Frosh Chem, whether taken over three 10 week quarters or 2 15 week semesters. Can be just one textbook, btw.</p>

<p>On a quarter system you generally take less classes per term than a semester system. It all works out in the end.</p>

[sofla951]

<p>hey DunninLA could you post a link to the graphs you spoke off..if they are online.</p>