Hi everyone! I was recently admitted to both UCLA and UChicago. I am torn between these two schools and I have no idea which school to choose. I am from southern California and for both schools I put my prospective major as biochemistry. Tution isn’t a huge factor, but UCLA is obviously much cheaper for me. I have visited both schools and I like them both equally. UChicago would be a new experience for me and I don’t know what to expect. I absolutely loved the campus and all the people there. UChicago would be a new adventure for me. However, the weather is cold and I am not the biggest fan of cold weather… For UCLA, I feel like I would thrive there, since I know the area pretty well and it’s sunny 24/7. I like the area surrounding UCLA (Westwood). One thing I don’t like about UCLA is there large class sizes and I feel like I won’t get a personalized experience. I am also a pretty social person and I am scared that UChicago will not offer me a typical college experience. I know that UChicago is a better school academically, but I’m not sure what to do. I don’t know if I should choose the familiar or the unfamiliar… Any insight would really help!
If I were you, I would choose Chicago in a heartbeat, but only because that’s the type of school I prefer: private, smaller class sizes, location, etc. But ultimately, I think you would like either school. And in the long run, no employer will look down on UCLA as less rigorous as Chicago. Money does make UCLA more tempting, though, but if that’s not a big issue than perhaps I would focus on which school is better for your major? Or, if you plan on attending grad school, does that affect the money situation? I don’t know much about biochemistry, but I’m sure either school has a good program. Good luck in your decision!
They’re very different schools.
Can you describe an ideal school and list pros and cons?
Are you pre-med? Medical school is very expensive, and saving money at the undergrad level is a prudent move.
You’ll have large intro courses in the sciences at both universities - cell and molecular biology at Chicago enrolled 100 students this past fall, for example - but Chicago generally has smaller upper division courses in biology and chemistry than UCLA.
Honestly, it sounds like you’d be happiest somewhere like Pomona, which has small classes and sunny weather. Did you apply to any colleges smaller than Chicago?
What’s the cost difference between these two schools? When you say tuition isn’t a huge factor, is this because your parents are very wealthy and can pay for either easily; or because they have saved the full cost of both; or some other reason?
You really can’t go wrong with either.
I’m also curious about why you’re saying that tuition isn’t a huge factor. If there’s a really good reason that it’s not a huge factor (ie, your parents are really wealthy and the difference would be rounding error to them), then I’d go with whichever one you like more.
But otherwise, I’d probably recommend choosing UCLA if it’s much cheaper - saving money at the undergrad level is a really good idea.
I am in the same predicament as you are and I ended up choosing the school that was the cheaper option. I don’t know much about UChicago, but I hear the biochemistry at UCLA is pretty top notch. If you think about it, it’s just the first few years of school considering you will have to take more years after it for your career and degrees therefore, personally I would choose the cheaper option for now until 1) you know for sure that is the major you want to do since lots of kids switch halfway into college and 2) all the debt won’t come after you and eat you as much as it should.
I know that a lot of kids want to escape and explore a new world, but you could do that in 2-4 years. Basically, find a great foundation first where its cheap and stable before adding to it.
" For UCLA, I feel like I would thrive there, since I know the area pretty well and it’s sunny 24/7."
Now the sun never sets in California! I’m amazed! UCLA is a fantastic school. I would not pay a huge premium to attend Chicago, or any other school, for an undergraduate liberal arts degree.
I thought UChicago’s houses were known for their communities. I didn’t like the teaching or the anonymity of big science classes and my grades showed it. My med school dreams dashed early. I’d make academics a top priority in a decision. Also, I’m not sure how Chicago is but I noticed on our trip to UCLA that students had to take classes late into the afternoon/early evening. I’m guessing due to resource constraints. This can make for a long day and probably is a sign that it’s hard to graduate in 4 years.
With UCLA being a five year deal vs four year Chicago the cost saving from UCLA may not be that clear—you have to factor in an extra year of tuition/living expense PLUS loss of one year income (perhaps after medical school).
It’s a matter of space – there’s only so many classrooms available on each campus at any given time. UCLA has 30,000 undergraduates on 420 acres. Chicago has 6000 undergrads on 220 acres.
Most of the students taking more than 4 years at UCLA have either switched majors multiple times, are trying to do unwieldy double major/minor combinations, or have come in from a community college lacking some key graduation requirements or major pre-reqs. It is perfectly feasible to graduate within four years with proper planning.
Wait, why would UCLA take 5 years?
You CAN graduate from UCLA in 4 years, but that require very careful planning, one small slip or if you change your mind, it could take another year, its everywhere in the UC system, not only at UCLA.
Its difficult in any school for premeds, only 25-30% of the incoming premeds will ever apply for med school, the drop out rate is very high. At UCLA, you are basically a number and it is on your own to get to the point of applying. At Chicago you have more hand holding, therefore the chances to apply for med school is higher, but not by a lot. Don’t get me wrong, I went through the med school application process with my D from U Chicago already and did face the difficulties.
@artloversplus, though someone who comes in with a fair amount of AP credits is less likely to slip to 5 years because of planning, no?