Hey everyone, right now I am currently deciding between UCLA and UCB but I have no idea which one to pick.
I was admitted as a pre-math/econ major at UCLA (plan to switch to business econ) and undeclared at UCB. I am interested in pursuing business, and I know that UCLA doesn’t provide any undergraduate business program/major (other than business econ, which I heard isn’t really “business” related). On the other hand, the Haas Undergrad program is one of the top undergrad business programs in the country but is super competitive and difficult to get into.
I am also taking the housing situations and overall social/residential student life into consideration. From my visits to the two schools, I got the feeling that UCLA students seem happier, more social, and overall more friendly than Berkeley students. The dorms at UCLA also seem in general nicer. Grade deflation at UCB also scares me.
I guess what I am trying to ask is whether or not it is worth “taking a risk” by going to Berkeley and pursuing business, even though I might not be admitted to the undergrad business program. Or do I go to UCLA, where I’d most likely enjoy my time more, but be less likely to pursue a career in business? (fyi I am interested in sports business if that helps).
I don’t believe that you’d be settling if you majored in Math-Economics at UCLA or, say, just Economics at Cal. These are incredible majors, and the melding of math with econ would give you a deep rich basis of theory, which would make a bus application like finance extremely easy for you; the same for just Econ at either.
Here are UCLA’s [lower-division[/url] Econ offerings, and the upper-division courses tab is right next to it. As far as whether UCLA’s Business Econ isn’t really “business” related, I’m not sure what you mean. Here are the [url=https://catalog.registrar.ucla.edu/ucla-catalog18-19-937.html]lower- division](https://www.registrar.ucla.edu/Academics/Course-Descriptions/Course-Details?SA=ECON&funsel=3) offerings and the upper-division courses tab is next to it if you make it into the major. It encompasses a lot of accounting, but between econ and management, you’ll get a wide array of bus and commerce training. UCLA is one of the most entrepreneurial colleges in the nation, with graduates near the top in startups – not sure if this is Forbes which reports this. But it won’t be a lot easier to gain entry into this major compared to Cal’s Haas, because you’ll have to do well in requisite courses with a very good gpa also.
The reason why Haas is so good in placing into consulting, banking, finance, accounting, etc., is because of a self-restriction by the University of the number of bus majors who enter and graduate from Haas. In other words, Cal doesn’t flood the market with them, which enables its grads to have these top-tier choices because they’re all top-tier grads, probably all graduating with at least cum laude designation.
UCLA’s doesn’t have quite the options and it isn’t really a fledgling major; it’s been around for a while – but it is restrictive also. Because of this, Bus Econ at UCLA is gaining a better rep because its grads are becoming higher-tier grads also.
Yes, because Econ at Cal as I stated earlier is a great major.
I’m not sure who’s giving you advice, but the person who’s in your ear doesn’t know of what he or she speaks.
Casey Wasserman has one of the best agencies in all of sports – and it covers many of the major ones. He just has a political science degree from UCLA. There are several former UCLA athletes who are agents for NBA, MLB and NFL players, and some for coaches, etc. And if UCLA athletes can become agents, then a scholar as yourself could become involved it agency also. Most UCLA grads would consider something a bit higher in law or bus and commerce, however. If you play sports in high school, you might want to try to become a manager for a UCLA sports team, because this is a coveted position for anyone who wants to do just about anything related to the business side of sports or business in general as it’s an excellent EC.
UCLA’s bus econ is the safer choice with around a 3.3+ GPA to get into the major vs. UCB Haas of almost 3.7 GPA for transfers from UCB. Many chose UCLA for that reason and the reasons stated above. Also if not admitted to Haas and you end up being an econ major, you’ll have lower priority in taking the few Haas courses. Further, many UCLA bus econ major grads are offered great business related jobs in finance, consulting, accounting, etc. with investment banking firms like Goldman Sachs, Big 4, JP Morgan, Black Rock, etc.
@shadow219 Exact same boat for me. I was deciding between UCLA Bus Econ and UC Berkeley undeclared pre-business. I’m not sure I really buy the whole “grade deflation is worse at Berkeley than at UCLA” argument. If you look at the student bodies at both schools, they’re virtually identical. I find it hard to believe that the grading rigor is all that different. I think Cal just historically had a reputation for being an academics-first kind of a place, whereas UCLA historically had a rep for being a place for more “well-rounded” types. I’m not sure there’s really much of a difference nowadays, considering both schools accept roughly 15% of applicants, and both have student bodies with average HS weighted GPAs of 4.4+.
For me, I liked the fact that the Haas option is “available” if I want it and if I do well enough in the first two years. Whereas UCLA bus econ is a great option, it’s not a “traditional” business ad degree program. Yes, Haas admissions are competitive (3.6 or 3.7 to transfer in after soph year), but again, at least the option is there if you want to pursue it.
For me, it really came down to just wanting something new. I’d worked for 2 summers as an intern at UCLA, and it was a very familiar and comfortable environment. Berkeley is a bit further away from home, but the campus “look and feel” and overall environment felt pretty different from UCLA. Finally, I felt like the academic reputation of Berkeley was a strong selling point, especially given my interest in something quantitative like data science/analytics, statistics, or maybe finance.
I finally sent in my SIR last week, but I took a lot of time to finally decide on Cal. Good luck.
I agree with you principally about the matching quality of students at each.
And the reason why the 15% isn’t lower is because there’s a UC-gpa floor of 3.0 for CA residents and a 3.4 for non-CA residents. It is a bit more restrictive for non-residents, but someone with a 3.4 wasn’t going to gain entry to either university anyway as admissions for this cohort is more about stats. People place too much emphasis on which college has the lowest acceptance rate. Is it Stanford with a 3-4% rate or Columbia? Actually there’s a self-selection process (big word here on this board) that points to Harvard and Cal Tech having the most naturally smart people of all colleges. But UCLA and Cal do pretty well in the brainiac department.
What I find impressive about both universities is when I see gpa unfiltered through weights, which can hide a fairly pedestrian gpa. The average unweighted gpa, 10-11, a-g at both is ~ 3.9. Cal isn’t quite as transparent as UCLA, and certainly UCLA is more free-flowing in its information: 3.92 uwgpa to 38th percentile; 3.85 to the 25th; and these imply or project to a 3.95 median uwgpa at UCLA. Both undoubtedly have > 1,400 median SAT, if both superscored, UCLA’s would be ~ 1,430 and Cal’s a bit higher.
I believe the main difference between them, though, is the personality traits of the students at each, and I think it is true that Cal’s are a bit more brooding and UCLA’s more friendly; I believe that a lot of this has to do with the mindsets that each of the student bodies takes on with respect to being in NorCal or SoCal, with component things as weather, and Hollywood and the tech industry within these two regions.
But this difference is what makes the UC colleges so incredible. Not one is like the other; they are all unique. Clearly the best university system in the world.