<p>Cal Poly engineering grad here with several UCLA grad relatives. I have some insights into the physics department due to my senior project (senior thesis) happened to be cross disciplinary and intersected with the physics department heavily. </p>
<p>So if you are seriously contemplating about getting a Phd in Physics eventually, you should go to UCLA. Physics is a basic research field and UCLA would have superior resources and facilities in basic physics research. Additionally, getting connected with physics faculty members in UCLA will help your eventual goal of getting into a Phd physics program. Cal Poly is not a basic research school, we have some research, but it is much more oriented toward industry applications. Moreover, our physics program won’t have the scale that UCLA has.</p>
<p>Alternatively, if you are serious about switching into engineering and perhaps even work a bit prior to graduate school, I would recommend you going to Cal Poly. Cal Poly’s college of science and math has very similar admission standards as the college of engineering, so for you to switch from physics to engineering should not be too much of a challenge as long as your grades in SLO is decent. Physics is look upon as a very rigorous major within Cal Poly and the school of engineering, they don’t consider it as a back door admission ploy. You probably have a superior chance of switching into engineering in Cal Poly than UCLA because of the structure of the colleges. But if you are a rock star scholar then the switch should be of no concern, and UCLA engineering will also be a very good choice. The main differences between SLO and UCLA engineering is that we are very much professionally oriented, we are all about landing you that great post undergrad job. UCLA is more about going straight to graduate school post graduation. </p>
<p>I don’t know enough about the pros and cons of the UCLA physics department. But I can tell you that Cal Poly physics is smaller and more intimate. The students really get to bond between themselves and with the faculty, and it feels very much like a small family. The quality of the teaching at Cal Poly physics is good. We have very small classes and the faculty is very involved in teaching. But our research facility is less impressive than UCLA for sure. I am almost certain that undergraduate UCLA physics will be mostly taught by TAs, given their senior faculty will be too busy doing research. So depending on your learning style, one might suit more than the other. </p>
<p>The pros of Cal Poly is that we are a smaller university compared to UCLA. So we have a lower faculty to student ratio, and we are a dedicated teaching institution. We are located in a very idyllic location, right off the central coast of CA with 3 beautiful beaches near by and wonderful climate year round. We are not a big sports school, so our school spirit is derived from our deep sense of a close-knit university community. I would say 99% of the Cal Poly’s students and faculties REALLY want/love to be here, not because of lack of choices, and so that sense of esprit de corps is evident in almost every aspect of university life. The campus itself is sizable (largest land holding public uni in CA), decent looking, and student life is very active ranging from sports, interests clubs, to professional organizations. </p>
<p>We are more collaborative than UCLA academically. Competition between students are less intense, probably because we are a smaller student body, plus we are located in a very mellow location with all the mountains, and farms, and beaches, and a small posh downtown. We are definitely not Westwood area.</p>
<p>Either university will provide you with a great undergraduate education, it all depends on your personal preferences and also future academic plans. </p>