<p>which is better and why when cost isnt an issue?</p>
<p>i say usc, way more diverse, campus is smaller, and a nice feel on campus.</p>
<p>UCLA-better school. also has the nice feeling on campus of not being located in south-central.</p>
<p>Admissions:
-Acceptance rates are virtually identical
-UCLA has slightly higher average GPA
-USC has slightly higher average SAT</p>
<p>Student Body:
-USC is significantly more diverse, unless you are Asian in which case UCLA would be preferable
-UCLA has more students from middle class families
-USC has more students from poor families but also more students from rich families</p>
<p>Sports:
-Both have great sports traditions, with UCLA particularly excelling in basketball and USC particularly excelling in football.</p>
<p>Academics:
UCLA as a school has a little more prestige due to its historical excellence. USC is the "new kid on the block" and its prestige is rising rapidly, but not quite to the level of UCLA. The inherent nature of prestige is that it has lag time, so there would be a better comparison 5 years from now.</p>
<p>Programs:
-USC has a highly ranked undergrad business program. UCLA does not have an undergrad business program but instead has an biz-econ major.
-USC has somewhat of a weakness in the College of Letters, Arts, and Sciences and UCLA excels in this area.
-Both UCLA and USC have good engineering programs. However, UCLA has more of a sink-or-swim approach to educating whereas you will get more attention/support at USC.
-USC's film school is probably the best in the U.S. UCLA's Film School is good, but not to the level of USC.</p>
<p>Location:
Westwood > The area around USC.</p>
<p>Campus:
Both have very nice campuses, and it comes down the the style you prefer. UCLA is more majestic/monumental while USC is more charming/cozy.</p>
<p>*Alumni Relations *</p>
<p>The Trojan Family is no Joke. While I'm sure UCLA's network is strong, the school isn't particularly known for this.</p>
<p>I mentioned this earlier, but UCLA has more of a sink-or-swim mentality where you have to assert yourself a lot more in getting attention for TA's/Professor's. Some do well when they are an anonymous person in a lecture hall, others do better in smaller, more intimate classes. Also, UCLA is a public school and thus there will a lot more bureaucratic red tape. USC is more nimble in this regard. In addition, the school spirit at USC is tremendously strong. UCLA has spirit, but not to the level of USC.</p>
<p>I might add on to this later, but this is a start.</p>
<p>^^ good post. nice advice</p>
<p>Overall, I would say that UCLA is known as the better school. But, USC is still a great school. Both are very good places to study.</p>
<p>UCLA & USC are compared to as often as Berkeley & Stanford or Northwestern & UChicago are. I'd say they're on par with each other (goods weighing out the bads, etc.), but UCLA is generally more well known.</p>
<p>
[quote]
UCLA & USC are compared to as often as Berkeley & Stanford or Northwestern & UChicago are. I'd say they're on par with each other (goods weighing out the bads, etc.), but UCLA is generally more well known.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>[cheapshot]</p>
<p>Except, unlike the other two pairs, there is no comparison between Cal and Stanford. </p>
<p>[/cheapshot]</p>
<p>I kid, I kid. :p</p>
<p>in terms of academic quality, both are equals overall - but each has individual programs that are better than at the other.</p>
<p>What subject were you looking to study? At the risk of over-generalizing, UCLA has an edge in most liberal arts subjects, while USC has the edge in most professional schools (business, communications, film, etc...)</p>
<p>"I kid, I kid."</p>
<p>Pfft, damn right you are. =p</p>
<p>"UCLA has an edge in most liberal arts subjects, while USC has the edge in most professional schools (business, communications, film, etc...)"</p>
<p>Haha USC has the edge in business? This is because UCLA doesnt have an undergrad business school or major. So comparing graduate schools in business, UCLA is actually ranked slightly higher than USC. So no, i would deffiantly not say USC is stronger in business than UCLA. Communication and Film I would agree with you on however. As an overall university, UCLA has more strong departments over a broader range of subjects, but USC is rising rapidly in many areas. As a UCSD and UCLA student, I can honestly say that USC, as a private university, has the potential to rise even further in the rankings. However, academically, across the board UCLA is stronger than USC. Yet, USC's classes are significantly smaller and USC offers a much more personalized education, which is highly desirable in my opinion and something that i felt was/is lacking at UCSD and UCLA. It really comes down to choice, UCLA has a better academic reputation, however USC is catching up fast. If smaller classes and more personal attention is important i would choose USC. If a larger more research university with a slightly better academic reputation is important to you, choose UCLA. I personally would never pay for USC, especially if i got into UCLA. But im sure others would. Also, UCLA's campus is significantly nicer than USC's, especially the areas around the universities (westwood, beverly hills) vs. (south central). School pride, however, at USC is very strong, even stronger than UCLA. And UCLA has quite a bit of school spirit. Best of luck deciding!</p>
<p>USC's ungrad business is better than UCLA's business econ. The connections you make at USC’s Marshall are far superior to anything UCLA can offer in this department. USC also has a better film school. UCLA is superior in many other ways and is a better overall school. USC is in an absolutely atrocious area, but the campus is beautiful.</p>
<p>ucchris, I'm well aware that UCLA does not have an undergraduate business program. However, USC's undergraduate business program is much stronger than UCLA's biz-econ major. Marshall provides excellent preparation for students planning on going into business, whether it be finance, management, operations, marketing, or entrepreneurial endeavors. UCLA's biz-econ program is not one of UCLA's stronger programs, and it provides only basic instruction in business disciplines such as finance, management, operations, etc... It really is unfortionate that UCLA undergraduates are not allowed to take courses in Anderson. </p>
<p>The reason I even compare Marshall's undergraduate program with UCLA's biz-econ major, is that students from these two programs often end up competing for the same jobs.</p>
<p>It's easy to underestimate the differences in class size. For example, calculus I (naturally, an important freshman intro course for science and engineering majors)</p>
<p>For the Fall '06 quarter, UCLA had 4 sections - each with 175, 193, 169, and 195 students respectively
For the same Fall '6 semester at USC, 8 sections were offered, each with 58, 35, 45, 40, 19, 37, 29, and 13 students respectively.</p>
<p>There's not really any comparison at all, in terms of professor interaction and personal attention, between classes with 170 students and ones with 30 or so.</p>
<p>Which is not to say that there aren't big, huge classes at USC also - they just tend to be in the vast minority. One course I took with 200, another with 145 - the rest have averaged around the same sizes as the calculus course (between 10 and 50). Lots of classes are capped - 15 students in each freshman writing, 30 in freshman arts and letter, both required GE's, for example.</p>
<p>sfgiants: I can't tell. Which one of 'Cal vs Stanford' are you saying is better?</p>
<p>^^ Haha, I later realized it would've be a nice comeback to agree with sfgiants and say that Cal is better. :P</p>
<p>here at UCLA the daily bruin's lowest movie rating is an "USC"</p>
<p>It might not matter which school you go to, considering that you'll be hanging out in Westwood anyways.
Too many USC students at Starbucks/Diddy Reese yesterday... :rolleyes:</p>
<p>As some of you are touting USC's business program, keep in mind most elite schools don't have biz ug programs; many CEOs/employers also have doubts about business education at the ug level. Undergrad biz rankings therefore don't really have as much beef as MBA ranking (for which, Marshall is out of top-20). Many top privates without ug biz programs have better placement in consulting/investment banking than USC. So, I am not sure if USC biz students are really "far superior" to UCLA's biz econ majors as far as job prospect goes.</p>
<p>Sam Lee: Over the long run, you are certainly correct. Over the span of an individuals entire career, the differences between majoring in Business, Biz-econ, or anything else, are reduced to pretty much zero. Obviously, you are also correct that many elite schools don't have ug business programs (although a few do, like upenn wharton or even berkeley hass).</p>
<p>But none of that changes the fact that if a student does want to be able to study business at the ug level, then USC would be a better choice.</p>