<p>So after visiting both campuses, here are my thoughts:</p>
<p>UCLA:
Better social life and overall environment (can be subjective, but many people that are in both universities agree with me about this).
At least for my major, a stronger major overall (pre-med). Although it’s stronger, It’s less interesting for me than the major at UCB.
Med school is right across the street, more volunteering/internship possibilities - maybe even more research possibilities.
Some say, the studies at UCLA are easier/more laid-back than at Berkeley which is cut-throat/ more difficult since there are “smarter” people there than UCLA. I think it’s a myth or depends on the major/self-experience. Both schools have pretty similar average GPA, and most people who got in (as transfers) to UCLA, also got in to Berkeley (This is at least from my own experience, looking at people around me as a transfer student).
Located in a better city (LA) and overall area than UCB (ghetto + homeless people all over the place).
Better weather overall (sunny most of the year)
Better food all around (inside or outside campus) and better/newer dorms.
Transfer students don’t get a hit in terms of financial aid if they choose to live in the dorms as a transfer student. It appears that UCB considers transfer students dorms (WADA) as out of campus, so you get less money (about $4000 less/year), but you’re not forced to buy a meal plan.
Has better sports environment if this matters to you (I don’t really care, but it’s another social aspect to be involved in and meet people).
Won’t need to fly home occasionally since my family is at LA (don’t really care, but it could save money + hassle in the long run).</p>
<p>UCB:
More prestige/better name/ranked higher for the most part (significant at my major. Rated #4 @ bio vs. #18 UCLA)
Has a nicer/more quite campus (a lot of trees, fresh air). UCLA has a lot of construction going on. UCLA’s campus is in the middle of the city, with lots of cars and noise overall. It feels more hyper there.
I can double major at UCB and finish at the same time if I go to UCLA (since my major in UCLA is all sequenced, and I can take classes by this sequence only).
On a semester system. I haven’t been on a quarter system, but it’s a hit or a miss. Some people like it, some hate it. It would definitely soften the transition from a CC to go to UCB since I wouldn’t need to adjust to the quarter system. I would only need to register to classes twice a year vs. 3 times on a quarter system. Buy book only twice a year as well. But there is a negative to that since a semester is 16 weeks, so you are probably responsible for more material on the exam, and if the classes is not your cup of tea, you’ll need to suffer 6 more weeks.</p>
<p>So yeah, I’m back to square one. Social life + stronger (But less interesting major) at UCLA vs. prestige + weaker (but more interesting major - possibly double major to make the weakness) at UBC.
This is basically what my thoughts are down to. Weather, sports, food, dorms, the city around the campus - these things aren’t that important in my opinion, but can make a difference for some people. </p>
<p>In all fairness, Cal’s prestige is really from its graduate programs. I believe that Cal and UCLA both will offer you a great undergraduate education, unless it’s something specific that the other one does not offer like Business Administration at Berkeley or Film and Television at UCLA. The “Berkeley” name does give you the higher advantage though but those rankings don’t apply to undergrad. </p>
<p>I don’t get why everyone is arguing about what school is better, they are both very prestigious. I feel it is extremely black and white that Berkeley is ranked higher, not only regionally, but worldwide- don’t give me that grad school BS either. Should that stop you from going to UCLA? No, because they are both premier universities and the highest rated public institutions in the WORLD. UCLA will NEVER outrank Berkeley overall, because Berkeley basically is UCLA’s daddy and the original University of California- with age comes prestige. </p>
<p>@ocnative Berkeley, because it will give me the best shot to get into an Ivy league MBA program. If I was younger and wanted a better social environment, I would probably pick UCLA, but I have already done enough partying for five lifetimes over. </p>
<p>Meh, I think that UCLA can eventually match or very, very nearly match Berkeley in the rankings. Small chance, but possible, that it can outrank it. Just because one school is older than another, it doesn’t mean that it will always outrank it.</p>
<p>UCSD outranks UCR even though UCR is the older of the two institutions. So, a school like UCLA can <em>possibly</em> come to outrank Berkeley…theoretically. And, to be fair, UCLA is ranked higher than comparable schools like University of Michigan and the University of Virginia. Michigan and Virginia are public schools that were founded in the early 19th century, before Berkeley, and are also considered top U.S. public schools, and yet, UCLA outranks them. UCLA isn’t even 100 years old yet and it outranks these two schools that were founded in a time when some of the Founding Fathers of the United States were still alive.</p>
<p>Nothing is impossible when it comes to rankings. :)</p>
<p>There are too many variables to consider. I agree with your points, but comparing those schools to UCLA is like comparing apples to oranges; the geographic and socio-economic factors overpower the “prestige by age” theory I established. Whereas, UCLA and Berkeley are very close in those geographic and socioeconomic factors. Look at Havard/Yale/Princeton, I don’t feel its a coincidence they are ranked in that order by prestige and age- although there is certainly no concrete data to prove either point. </p>
<p>OK, let’s limit our comparisons to the UC system. I already mentioned that there’s at least one UC in the system that outranks a few of its older counterparts: UC San Diego. These UCs are probably about as similar to each other as the Ivy Leagues are to each other and yet one of the younger schools in the system outranks two older UC schools.</p>
<p>So, isn’t at least <em>conceivable</em> that Berkeley may be outranked or completely matched in the rankings some time in the far future(Maybe 40+ years, lol) by UCLA? Also, one should keep in mind how prestigious UCLA has gotten considering it’s the youngest university in the top 25 ranked schools of USNWR. It’s only 95 years old.</p>
<p>Don’t misconstrue these words as coming from a butthurt UCLA fan who didn’t get into Berkeley or anything. I did, but I’ve chosen UCLA instead. Rankings aren’t monolithic and immutable. Schools move up and down and age, although a significant factor in prestige, isn’t the only one and isn’t even the most important one. :)</p>
<p>Oh, and I think you would’ve been fine if you went to UCLA and applied to Ivy League MBA programs. It’s not like they’re going to pick a Berkeley student over a UCLA student any day. Grades, work experience, letters of recommendation, and resumes are most important. One’s pedigree would probably only matter if the difference were between Berkeley or LA and Merced, or any of the CSUs.</p>
<p>@ocnative we can’t actually prove what we are saying lol. Let’s just agree that UCLA and Berkekey are the best in the region other than Stanford and that we are bosses for getting into both ;)</p>
<p>@jewbacca, except for the fact that it’s absolutely true that UCB’s “prestige” is derived mainly from GS programs. Regionally, if we’re using rankings, UCB is two slots higher in the most popular US ranking source. Hardly black and white. </p>
<p>And I wouldn’t be surprised if UCLA does outrank Berkeley in UG rankings in the future. How these entities rank schools continually changes. </p>
<p>Although I must admit that it’s downright freaky how Stanford got to be as good as Harvard even though it’s substantially younger than most of the Ivy Leagues.</p>
<p>The issue of UCLA vs UCB is not that difficult. The school’s are ranked fairly close to one another, and so what if UCB is ranked marginally higher? I was confident I was getting into UCLA and I didn’t get overly excited when the news came in. I thought about applying UCB, I was also confident I would get in but felt, you know it is not an Ivy League school, so, I got UCLA 20 minutes away from me, why go all the way to mundane Central/Northern California? I have always loved LA’s energy, and what has provided me, not only a social level, but also spiritual. Again, in terms of academia, the universities are close, both are respected not only on a national level but international. To those that are facing the dilemma, I have to say, would you want to live in LA or Berkeley? Those that have lived in LA, I would say, you really want to give up LA to live in Berkeley? If so, then so be it, enjoy. </p>
</p>
UCLA isn’t even 100 years old yet and it outranks these two schools that were founded in a time when some of the Founding Fathers of the United States were still alive.</p>