<p>Are there any affordable houses around either campuses? If dorm rooms cannot be promised after the first year, where do the students live?</p>
<p>how do you quote other people in posts (random i know)</p>
<p>As far as housing after freshman year- there are the greek houses at both schools. There is also off campus housing adjacant the schools in terms of privately owned and University owned apartments, private homes etc. Pretty expensive immediately next to UCLA in Westwood, but there are lots of alternatives. Often, people end up a little drive away and as such both schools have large commuter populations. The neighborhood around SC is horrible and off campus housing immediatley north of the campus is about it. There is quite a bit, but I wouldn't call it plentiful. IMO the lack of housing on and immediately next to these campuses is one of their (few) drawbacks.</p>
<p>bullwinkle, you keep saying that UCLA and USC have significant commuter populations. They do not. Where are you getting this statistic? Living immediately off-campus (within walking/biking distance) is not the same as being a commuter nor are these students factored into commuter statistics. Both schools, in fact, have small commuter populations.</p>
<p>Harry 7374, I don't know how to quote them either.lol ;) Are all of campus housing significantly more expensive than the dorms?</p>
<p>themegastud- don't know what "stats" you have. Happy to see 'em. IMO USC and UCLA have extremely large commuter populations. they always have and their enrollments, especially SC's, have increased over the years with little to no new housing having been added. Happy to be corrected. further, beyond freshman year, what on campus housing do they have at either school.
SC for example has people living in what used to be a hotel on Figueroa across the street. </p>
<p>They've bought housing up around wilshire or 6th next to the harbor freeway that is certainly not walking distance. they've also bought housing on Adams, east of Hoover. Beyond this and fraternity row, the blocks from Campus and the Shrine, up to Adams are about it. I'm quite sure that leaves a whole lot of people left to commute. Pretty much the same at UCLA.</p>
<p>harry and mackie, to make quotes just put a
[quote ]
line you want to quote
[/quote ]
. (but please remove the spaces between the brackets; i just put them there so it wouldn't turn into an actual quote box)</p>
<p>When you do it correctly, it will appear as this:
[quote]
line you want to quote
[/quote]
</p>
<p>As far as I know in housing, on-campus housing is limited; mostly Freshman. But I hear that many continuing students do not mind. A lot of the off-campus housing is owned by the University, then there are a couple of private landlords around the area as well.</p>
<p>The Radisson Hotel on Figueroa is actually part-hotel part-university dorms. They recently took out more floors for dorm space.</p>
<p>Correct Bullwinkle... USC does have a School of Pharmacy (one of the oldest and best in the nation at that- celebrating their 100th year anniversary this year actually), ucla does not. (UCSD and UCSF are the only "UC's" that have one)</p>
<p>Yes, most non-freshmen students don't mind not living on campus. The majority of people love it their first year, and then want to move off campus to houses, apts, or greek houses.</p>
<p>
[quote]
UCLA is a very large public University and SC a medium sized private school. I think this greatly impacts on class size and availability and while you can get out of SC in four years, may not be that easy at UCLA, but certainly can be done.</p>
<p>I think it is a toss up as to which school is now harder to get into.</p>
<p>SC has a strong alumni network and UCLA's is so-so at best. The old saying is that you're a Bruin for 4 years and a Trojan for life. Again, the SC alumni network is probably one of the best, at least throughout the SoCal region.</p>
<p>Both schools have great grad programs, I think SC is a little stronger in Film, architecture, both are strong in law and medicine. SC has pharmacy, which I don't think UCLA has. SC has an undergrad business program and UCLA has none. UCLA also does not have undergrad architecture, which you will find at SC.</p>
<p>I think you'll get a better feel of a "community" at SC, but both have large commuter populations and neither school has enough on campus housing. After freshman year, you're pretty much on your own at either. Both have fairly strong Greek systems, but I think at SC there is more influence.</p>
<p>the neighborhood around UCLA is vastly superior to that around SC. SC is pretty much an island in a rather depressed area. Both campuses are beautiful. UCLA is just too big for my taste and good luck parking there.</p>
<p>Both schools have great sports traditions, but SC's football stadium is w/i walking distance of campus and UCLA's is nearly an hour away (more 'cause of traffic than distance) at the Rose Bowl in Pasedena. Pauley Pavilion at UCLA for basketball/volleyball is quite outdated and SC is in the process of building a state of the art complex. Also Staples is just up the street from SC for Lakers, Clippers, Kings, concerts etc. Ucla is only about 20-30 minutes away though.</p>
<p>Both are great schools, but a clear distinction in terms of size, public v. private and there are particular majors that you will not find at both.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Very accurate and fair. Nice post Bullwinkle.</p>
<p>Afterhours- thanks. much appreciated.</p>
<p>im from georgia. would geographic diversity help any?</p>
<p>Hmmm... I dunno, maybe I'm biased, but to say SC is "a little stronger in Film" is a major understatement. If I had to chose between a large public and a medium private (actually SC is a pretty large private), there's no question I would go with the latter. But it seems to me that you're leaning on the SC side, so right on, Fight On.</p>
<p>USC is actually the 2nd largest private university in the US, after NYU. It's enrollment is 31000, only 6000 less than UCLA.</p>
<p>With a small campus and the attention you get at USC, however, they do a really nice job of making it seem much smaller than it really is. It certainly seems much smaller than UCLA.</p>
<p>I think UCLA's undergrad majors sound really boring. I personally wouldn't understand why someone would choose UCLA over USC, because frankly UCLA is too overpopulated and the chances of you getting accepted into some of their majors after you do the pre-majors are what? While at USC at least if you put down Business, or say Communications as your major, that's what your major is going to be if you are accepted. </p>
<p>I think UCLA tries to make up for what USC has. UCLA is jealous of USC.</p>
<p>Harry, i'm also from georgia and i second your question.
And can two schools really be jealous of one another? We're giving the schools personalities of their own. It's weird.</p>
<p>This is kinda off topic, but I'm wondering...USC gets names like Univ. of Spoiled Children/Univ. of South Central, but what about UCLA? Are there any names for THEM? Cuz I don't hear it too often...</p>
<p>:( someone answer my question</p>
<p>harry:</p>
<p>redski59 already answered your question</p>
<p>"This is kinda off topic, but I'm wondering...USC gets names like Univ. of Spoiled Children/Univ. of South Central, but what about UCLA? Are there any names for THEM? Cuz I don't hear it too often..."</p>
<p>university of c0ck loving @$$holes, thats the best i can think of</p>