<p>I am debating between USC and UCLA. I am interested in Business/Economics and history... I have a tough choice people please help.</p>
<p>This is my college rank list:
1. USC
2. UCLA
3. TRINITY, CT
4. KENYON, OH</p>
<p>there's no point in attending ucla for business/economics.</p>
<p>usc beats ucla in this, with regards to networking in southern california, and entering marshall as a freshman instead of having to apply for it once you're in school(like ucla)</p>
<p>UCLA Bizecon is very similar to Marshall's program. the only difference is that UCLA BizEcon doesn't include Marketing and Real Estate courses in the curriculum since it doesn't follow the traditional business program curriculum.</p>
<p>things you learn as UCLA BizEcon: Finance, Investment, Accounting, Management, Taxation, Economics.
thigns you learn as USC Business: Finance, Investment, Accounting, Management, Real Estate, Marketing, Economics</p>
<p>Basically, you'll learn same thing whether you go to USC or UCLA, except if you have interest in real estate or marketing, which the major doesn't matter at all, so that's irrelevant.</p>
<p>If you were to choose a college based on the programs, both are equal. Job prospect is also equal. You'll have to look at other factors to finalize your decision (financial aid, scholarships, environment). Visit the campus, talk to people there and see if you see yourself there for four years.</p>
<p>dhl3, you're totally incorrect about the comparison between UCLA BizEcon and USC Marshall.</p>
<p>Simply put, BizEcon does not offer significant finance, investment, or management course work. It's not comparable to Marshall in anyway. </p>
<p>Take the field of Finance for example. USC offers 20+ undergraduate courses in its finance department, covering ever aspect of finance and applied economics, including corporate finance, financial analysis, investments, trading & exchanges, advanced portfolio management, fixed income securities, international finance, and many more advanced courses. See the course offerings at USC</a> Catalogue: The Schools: USC Marshall School of Business: Courses of Instruction: Finance and Business Economics</p>
<p>UCLA BizEcon offers one single introductory (100-level) class in finance. The coursework in that class covers only the most basic finance topics and is really just an introductory applied economics class. See the BizEcon website for few classes offered in the entire program: Sample</a> BizEcon Courses</p>
<p>Overall, UCLA bizecon offers a single introductory class in each business discipline (accounting, OB, finance, marketing, entrepreneurship), while USC Marshall offers entire departments with dozens of advanced courses in each of the disciplines. There really is no comparison between the programs. If a prospective student is looking to study business, UCLA simply isn't an option.</p>
<p>^ I think those 400 series Marshall courses are graduate level, correct?</p>
<p>If so, you aren't comparing apples to apples. UCLA's Anderson school will have a larger selection of finance courses.</p>
<p>No, 400 level is undergraduate. 500 level and above is graduate.</p>
<p>^ 10-4....</p>
<p>I thought USC only had Accounting and Bus Admin undergrad? I'm pretty sure those are graduate classes.</p>
<p>Stevent, you're incorrect. The Finance and Business Economics department (FBE), which I linked to above, offers both undergraduate and graduate classes. All the 400 level classes are only open to undergrads. This is part of the Business Administration degree.</p>
<p>Here is a guide to all of the undergrad senior concentrations offered in the FBE department:</p>
<p>In order to graduate with a Business Administration degree, students must complete at least one senior concentration, such as the Finance concentrations linked to above or a concentration offered by another department in the business school.</p>
<p>I still fail to see how marshall courses are any different with UCLA's econ course.
UCLA has a separate accounting minor (which as a matter of fact has more than intro level courses, check the website out to see yourself wrong), and all those Marshall courses like financial derivatives and finance courses are all incorporated into UCLA's econ courses like Mathematical Finance series, Investment, Finance, and undergrad courses in Anderson (Managerial Finance courses, Investment principles and policies, Business Law courses, etc.).</p>
<p>As I said, if you are looking to get into Marketing or Real Estate, then go to USC which has their own departments dedicated to that concentration, but honestly, most business majors end up going into either Accounting or Finance, and I do not think UCLA lacks in anyway behind USC in preparing students for the "real world" business world of IBanking, Consulting, and Accounting. There is a reason why same exact type of firms recruit at both USC and UCLA.</p>
<p>This is no contest UCLA is ranked 11th in Econ and USC 40th nationally. </p>
<p>It is even more of a joke in history UCLA #6 and USC #70. </p>
<p>NRC</a> Rankings in History</p>
<p>dhl3, please post a link to the "undergrad courses in Anderson', because I don't believe undergrads can take courses in Anderson. I would be very interested to see if UCLA has any course offerings comparable to the finance courses I posted above. I provided links to the USC course guide, you should also provide links to the UCLA course guide to support your claim. Btw, this is coming from a Marshall alum now working in investment banking, who sees USC and UCLA resumes practically daily.</p>
<p>UCLA Phd, those rankings are, what, 17 years old? And based on quality of graduate research? They clearly have no bearing on todays quality of undergrad in the two schools.</p>
<p>
[quote]
please post a link to the "undergrad courses in Anderson', because I don't believe undergrads can take courses in Anderson.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Incorrect. Although Anderson is primarily a Grad school, there are a handful of courses that are open to undergrads. </p>
<p>Management (Anderson) courses:
UCLA</a> General Catalog 2007-08: Management Course Listings</p>
<p>Economics courses:
UCLA</a> General Catalog 2007-08: Economics Course Listings</p>
<p>All the courses below 200 are open to undergrads. Marshall maybe more "student-friendly" in terms of breaking down the areas into concentrations and allowing students to easily see which courses are relevant to his/her area of study, but if you see the overall courses for both schools, you'll be able to see very little difference between the courses offered in each. Lots of the Business courses in Marshall are incorporated in UCLA's Economics courses so the only major difference is the title. See through the courses yourself and please do change your perception on each schools.</p>
<p>Maybe this is just me being a silly member of the workforce, but... UCLA and USC offer very similar opportunities. I know plenty of people from both schools at major firms doing all kinds of work.</p>
<p>This isn't the difference between Harvard and UCLA. UCLA and USC are very comparable, and even if you miss a few courses here and there, it's not likely to matter a whole lot for 99% of jobs.</p>
<p>Seriously, just go where you think you'll be happiest. Don't worry about 3 or 4 classes.</p>
<p>UCLA, being by charter a research institution, has to be careful to make trade-school type courses (like many offered at Marshall) sound like academic courses -- so the course titles can be misleading. Dig deeper into course content and you'll see that the coursework and subject matter probably overlap a great deal with Marshall's.</p>
<p>Abel, if I were out of state (or by some other means USC and UCLA would cost the same), I would consider this a toss-up. If you are in-State, this is not even a close call.</p>
<p>Honestly, maybe this is just my young adult view of loans (in other words, they suck) kicking in, but I would just go with whichever school is cheapest in the case of such comparable institutions.</p>
<p>You want more current rankings check out the US News Graduate School rankings. Graduate rankings speak to the faculty and the quality of their work, this is important when you ask for letters of rec from your professors in your major: Economics UCLA 11, USC 41 and History UCLA 9, USC 46. These are from 2005. And the new NRC rankings come out in the fall of this year. There is no comparison between the two.</p>
<p>i think what this really comes down to is... do you want to be in south central la or in westwood right next to bel air</p>
<p>bcp05,</p>
<p>To be fair to USC, the area around it is fairly gentrified. I do think that UCLA's in a prime location, but it's not like USC is nearly as bad as people portray it to be.</p>