<p>I just got accepted into UCSB and UCSC as a history major(focusing on medieval/ancient) although I might change to an anthropology major(archaeology). I’m transferring from a JC and my current Anthro professor went to UCSB and recommends I go there. Anyways, to keep this short, I have definitely been leaning towards UCSB but I plan on visiting both campuses as well as doing more research. I was just wondering what everyone’s opinion was as far as being a better school for a anthro/history major. Thanks</p>
<p>Yes, UCSB is better in both disciplines. In addition, UCSB is among the middle tier UCs, while UCSC is among the low tier. Also, make sure you visit the campus, and do some research on the faculty of both UCs. I think that you will conclude that UCSB is by far the best option. Best of luck =)</p>
<p>UCSB might be ranked higher for Hist/Anthro but UCSC is generally regarded as a much prettier campus than UCSB.</p>
<p>I have to disagree with Vedanta a bit. UCSC is maybe considered among the lower tier because it's standards still aren't quite as high (3.7 average GPA instead of 4.0-ish) as the others when it comes to who they accept, but academically the school is not significantly worse off than UCSB, if at all.
A lot of choosing is about the feel of the school. If you don't like the atmosphere of UCSB, then you will probably not preform as well there, yeah?</p>
<p>If you wanna be lost in some forest go to ucsc.</p>
<p>Hmm...this isn't really a major point or anything, but when I was at UCSC they had a student created exhibit of real Medieval-ish (something around that time period, I'm not a history buff) bibles and manuscripts...seemed like a good program</p>
<p>I know this probably won't influence your decision at all, but I thought I'd add =]</p>