<p>I am having the hardest time deciding between these two schools. From what I have heard, they are fairly similar academically. They both have the school spirit and sports that I am looking for in a school as well. Also, I have visited both campuses and find them both equally beautiful. Would one or the other be a better pick if I plan on studying physiology (and ultimately going on to medical school)?</p>
<p>Also, for awhile I was considering NYU because I loved everything that you could do in the city and the fact that the university takes advantage of the city (and I ultimately decided against it because of the lack of school unity). However, I was wondering if either of the schools utilized their cities. Also, in general, which city is more like NY in terms of what there is to do? Do students actually go into the city and do things, or do they mainly stay on campus (or in Westwood for UCLA and the Ave for UW)?</p>
<p>One of the main things that is holding me back about UCLA is the fact that I have heard the students are very superficial and materialistic. Is this true? And if so, would it be better to pick UW as I would fit in more there? </p>
<p>Lastly, does it REALLY rain all of the time in Seattle?</p>
<p>First of all, I am glad you are open minded enough to see yourself at all of these places (UCLA, UW and NYU). As for your decision, don’t let hearsay dictate what you decide. There are materialistic and non materialistic people everywhere. It depends who you keep company with. Now that aside, UCLA is a bubble if you don’t have a car. Public transportation can take you west (to Santa Monica, the beach and Venice) BUT going anywhere else in LA is kind of a pain on the bus but if you can get around L.A. has ALOT to offer.</p>
<p>As for UW, yes it does rain ALOT in Seattle and overall I just don’t think UW quite matches up. It is a GREAT place, but if it was in the UC system I would place it 3/4 after UCLA and Cal. </p>
<p>Now if there is a significant cost difference I would opt for UW but all things being equal. UCLA would be my choice.</p>
<p>The current budget cuts at UW will make it VERY difficult for the majority of students to finish in four years. (about half can’t now, mostly for lack of classes).</p>
<p>Yes, it rains 8 months a year in Seattle. Total rainfall is the same as Boston’s, but we have it all the time. We learn to be Ducks!</p>
<p>If you are aiming at med school, and one is significantly cheaper, go for it.</p>
<p>****. I had this long post but it accidentally got deleted. Oh well.</p>
<p>Let’s go through this quickly.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>True. UCLA will have a slight edge overall, but they are both very strong schools.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I doubt the education you would get in physiology at either one would be lacking. However, the influence of their respective medical schools may vary. UW Med has a research rank of #6 and primary care rank of #1, while UCLA Med has rankings of #9 and #12, respectively. I don’t know how much this will make a difference, but there will definitely be a LOT of research and volunteering opportunities at both, with perhaps more at UW.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Hmm…they’re all cities; they will all have their own unique and awesome things that you can do. I’m not sure you can really use that as a metric. And what you get out of a city is what you put in; what you experience depends on the initiative you take. I’m sure a lot students at every one of these schools will go out into the city and experience life there.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I don’t know much about this, but I will say a few things. vociferous is absolutely right in that “there are materialistic and non materialistic people everywhere.” However, all stereotypes have a root in truth, and Seattle is also more generally known to be a less superficial city…so perhaps, Seattle is slightly more down-to-earth. I don’t think this difference should be what makes or breaks your decision, though. Wherever you go, you’ll find your niche.</p>
<p>It rains 50% of the time, apparently, though more so in the winter. Whether you can deal with this is up to you. I could probably live with it, but everyone is different. You would probably get used to it after a while, though.</p>
<p>Verdict: Both are great schools; you really have no wrong choice here. I would say that UCLA is slightly better academically, but maybe you’d fit in better at UW. I don’t really say anything big that would make one school a LOT more attractive than the other. At this point, follow the money. Whichever one is cheaper is probably a better bet (remember to factor in cost-of-living, too…Seattle will be cheaper than LA).</p>
<p>If cost isn’t a factor, I recommend you to try out the time-honored “flip a coin” technique. UCLA is heads, UW is tails. If you are happy with the result after flipping, then that’s the school you should go to. If you are fleetingly disappointed and wanted the other school, go to the other one, then.</p>
<p>As a UW alum (so understand the bias), someone who lived in LA for almost 20 years, and whose kids debated this same issue, I think sumzup does a good job.<br>
A couple other points that haven’t been mentioned:
IF you are thinking of going Greek, I think UW has a much stronger, healthier, system. Location is perfect-adjacent to campus. Sororities and frats are intermixed, which makes for easy access and consistent opportunity for friendship. There are always huge numbers of girls and guys walking to class, visiting, doing projects, etc., Greek system is very laid back/casual. At UCLA, the frats are on one side of campus and sororities the other. I always thought that was odd. D’s girlfriends have had some bad experiences within Greek system there…but I don’t know enough to make sweeping statement.
Without trying to disparage the types of kids at UCLA, I think that the UW just seems to draw an exceptionally well rounded type of student. Down to earth, serious about studies but able and willing to enjoy balancing all aspects of growing up. That said, you will find all kinds of people both places-and, you will find your niche.
Last thing…Seattle is an amazing city. Easy to access, easy to get around, loads of restaurants, music, sports, arts. People friendly, incredibly beautiful and nearby. I could never say the same for LA----though those beaches can’t be beat. </p>
<p>Oh yeah-totally disagree with mini re: getting thru in 4 years. It may be the way of the future at many of our publics, and UW (just like the UC’s) is looking at very challenging times. I could name 100 kids who made it thru in 4 years…and one who didn’t. (my son…changing major Sr. year didn’t help. Still can’t believe they let him do that). Most kids who take longer are not utilizing advisers, using good judgment, and/or developing a plan soon enough.</p>
<p>Oh…last thing! My son’s best memories of his FIVE years there…walking to football games with 75K people dressed in purple/gold. No football stadium at UCLA? They need to fix that…</p>
<p>“However, all stereotypes have a root in truth, and Seattle is also more generally known to be a less superficial city…so perhaps, Seattle is slightly more down-to-earth”</p>
<p>True in my experience. </p>
<p>“remember to factor in cost-of-living, too…Seattle will be cheaper than LA”</p>
<p>Absolutely. </p>
<p>“Oh…last thing! My son’s best memories of his FIVE years there…walking to football games with 75K people dressed in purple/gold. No football stadium at UCLA? They need to fix that…”</p>
<p>This sucks haha. But this is solely because the Westwood Home Owners Association and the Bel Air snobs blocked UCLA from building the stadium on campus. Citing traffic issues (which is legit actually)</p>
<p>The bus system is incredible in Seattle. You can get to downtown from the Ave in under 20 minutes … and it’s free with your bus pass.</p>
<p>And about graduating in 4 years. My experience is similar to caseyatbat. I know quite a number of business students and they all graduated in time, except for this one kid who took up internships during consecutive winter quarters…</p>
<p>I’m from CA (Bay Area) and my dd attends UW. She’s a junior and will be graduating on time with two majors and a minor. There are many things she absolutely loves about UW…the people, the Greek system, the school spirit, the classes, the campus, the bus system. She does not love the weather, but decided one way to get over it was to spend the winter studying in New Zealand (it was summer down there), and spending the summer in Seattle (she has heard it is magnificent.)</p>
<p>She has friends at UCLA, some graduating on time, some not. She loves going to games (even though the football has not been very good…UCLA hasn’t been great either). What I have found that living away (in a different area, climate, etc) has taught her what she likes and what she doesn’t like, and in my opinion that’s what the college experience is all about…taking yourself out of your comfort zone and learning about yourself. She has gotten all of that and more at UW.</p>
<p>Both are great schools, but as a 20 year Seattle resident and past Udub student I say GO TO LA. Seattle is a great city with a high quality of life, but if you want endless urban opportunities like ethnic food, tremendous diversity, large arts community and museums, Seattle is like living in Indianapolis compared to LA (no offense to Indy).</p>
<p>That said, if you are already a Californian come to Seattle for the change of pace!</p>
<p>I don’t know much about UW, but I got into UCLA too and I’ve crossed it off my list.</p>
<p>LA does have a lot to offer…only if you are willing to drive and battle LA traffic. It’s not like NYC, where you can easily walk or take the subway to where you need to go. Transportation is 100x better in New York, which makes things much more accessible. That’s not to say that LA isn’t a great resource you can take advantage of (I mean, I love LA!), it’s just a little bit harder.</p>
<p>When I visited UCLA, what I noticed was that the school was really focused on math and science, and it seemed to have a lot of great research opportunities. So if you’re into physiology and plan on going to med school, UCLA may be right up your alley. </p>
<p>Some of the things that personally turned me off from UCLA were the valley-girl-students they had speak to us (really, out of the 25,000 kids they could have talk to us, <em>those</em> were the ones they chose?), and the fact that the professors seemed distant and too reliant on TAs. </p>
<p>So, really, UCLA has it’s pluses and minuses : /</p>
<p>It’s almost a no brainer for me, personally. UCLA is beautiful, more prestigious, has more money(more aid)
I live in Washington and I know that UW gives out an extremely small amount of aid and grants. Also there are more ppl in UW. And I have to say, the weather (it does rain at least 4 days a week) seems unimportant, but it does affect me- negatively. </p>
<p>However, I guess some of these factors are subjective and aren’t important to some people. I think you should visit…</p>
<p>Stooge, I too live in Seattle and have lived in LA. Everything you speak of is available in Seattle and is far easier to access. Great ethnic food–for sure. The arts–I think the fine arts are fine in Seattle and not spread all over three counties. The weather–yes it sucks–LA wins for sure. As for the schools in the sciences I think UW and UCLA are peers and very close. UW is amazing in biosciences with easily as much research going on as UCLA. Plus you have all the biotech firms that are not around UCLA but down in San Diego versus right in the Seattle area.</p>
<p>Overall UW is greatly underrated. It belongs with the other top publics.</p>
<p>I know, I know it’s true. The higher quality of life is why I do love living here. And you can get lots of great food (HWY 99 Shoreline through Lynnwood is a goldmine!).</p>
<p>It’s my bias - Chicago born and raised - and at times I still yearn for the big city. Usually a short flight to LA or Chgo does the trick. But at 18-22 I know I didn’t care too much about traffic etc…</p>
<p>Being able to choose between UW and UCLA is a problem I would have welcomed at 18!</p>
<p>Yes, Chicago is still #1 in my heart too. Lived there about 8 years after college at Madison and never wanted to leave. Now I’m not so sure I could handle the winters as well–it’s a young person’s city.</p>
<p>I lived in Chicago, San Francisco, Los Angeles before moving to DC. I’d also spent a lot of time in Boston and San Diego. I definitely think and feel LA is by far the most superficial and materialistic among them. I see a lot more instances of people trying to show off their wealth or worrying about their images. </p>
That’s not necessarily true for students without cars. If you don’t have a car, LA becomes a gigantic system of suburbs. Yes, the “opportunities” are significantly more but over a much larger area and are practically out of reach without a car since you are not going to spend 90 mins on public transit just to go to, say, the Little Tokyo from Westwood. I used to live in West Holywood and I would have to drive about 45-mins (about 25 miles) to go to areas like Alhambra for authentic Chinese food. Now, if I were at UDubb, I could <em>walk</em> to the International district for authentic Chinese food. Sure, once you are in Alhambra, there are many more restaurants available (still keep your car though…lol) as opposed to just a few in the international district in Seattle; but it takes a lot of effort to get them in LA (driving 45 min-1hr just to get a particular kind of food sounds ridiculous to a lot of people).</p>