<p>1.) Double major in Business Economics and East Asian Studies</p>
<p>or</p>
<p>2.) Major in Economics/International Studies w/concentration in East Asia and minor in Accounting.</p>
<p>My goal is to study Accounting in order to prepare myself for CPA exam while at the same time adding in some East Asian studies into the course.</p>
<p>I've realized that Accounting Minor is nothing more than taking all of the Management Courses listed as options for Business Economics Upper Division courses.</p>
<p>So I thought even if I don't major in Business Economics, if I just take Economics/International Studies (which requires almost all the courses listed in Business Economics major) and minor in Accounting, I would be getting the same benefit of taking the Bus. Econ., and at the same time be studying some East Asian courses.</p>
<p>Is there any difference between the option #1 and option #2?</p>
<p>naw, i enjoy both.
Just cant decide which though lol
Well I was really expecting some people from the majors I mentioned in my original post would respond to this to help me out.</p>
<p>ahh UCLAri, you are right.
"It's really your choice. Take whatever you want" were exact words the counselor told me. I think I'm going to stick to the bus. econ.</p>
<p>But I'm also considering USC. I visited there for the first time in my life.
I kind of liked it.
Although UCLA campus and surrounding neighborhood was much much nicer, USC was much better with service and friendliness, plus it had more majors/minors than UCLA. Only prob with USC is its tuition fee and its ghetto neighborhood. </p>
<p>Now I have to think over this issue again.
They are both good...</p>
<p>I'm sorry UCLAri.
I mean to say "It had more majors/minors that I liked."</p>
<p>UCLA doesn't even have Business Administration or Accounting Major, it only has Economics, BizEcon, and Int. Studies.</p>
<p>USC has much more choice:
Accounting, 4 different types of Business, and Econ.</p>
<p>And I really liked USC's Business program.
So I'm wondering...
let's say I get accepted to both schools...
For Economics, I'd go to UCLA. For Business, I'd choose USC.</p>
<p>ugh, i just have so many things to think about :(</p>
<p>from all your previous posts, i think majoring in business-economics and minoring in accounting would best suit your interests. </p>
<p>and since image seems to be important to you, those not majoring in biz-econ are seen as the "biz-econ rejects" (though in reality not necessarily always true). and UCLA biz-econ grads are seen on equal caliber (as far as the overall package goes) with USC marshall grads when it comes to job recruitment.</p>
<p>Anyway, biz-econ is far from business major. It is primarily ECONOMICS.
It doesnt involve any case studying, consulting training, strategy planning, management skills, or etc. that's taught in regular business curriculum.</p>
<p>biz-econ isn't more like accounting. it's more like majoring in economics with a sample of business-related courses. it's not "more like accounting" though; most students who want to go into an accounting career will need to do the accounting minor and not just biz-econ. </p>
<p>
[quote]
It doesnt involve any case studying, consulting training, strategy planning, management skills, or etc. that's taught in regular business curriculum.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>i could be wrong, but first, i dont think most business administration classes teach you case studying for consulting. this is done on your own, in business related clubs, or for research projects, all of which take place at UCLA (as well as any other top college that has students wishing to go into consulting). UCLA students have success getting top consulting internships and jobs without having a class that teaches case studying, so it goes to show that there are other ways to practice for the consulting interview. </p>
<p>second, management skills are learned from an internship. of course, you might get a background of it from a business administration major and not from a biz-econ major, but those with "management skills" that stand out are the ones who actually interned, not the ones who just learned something from a class. thus, the key is to actually land an internship. and ucla students do quite well in this aspect. like i said earlier, in terms of recruiting, ucla biz-econ students are seem as equals to USC marshall students because of the soft factors and academic sharpness that the UCLA bizecon students bring to the table despite not having taken bizadmin classes. the UCLA students who've interned will be on the same level as the business administration students (who've interned) in terms of "management skills" that really matter.</p>
<p>and finally, you dont HAVE to major in business administration in order to land a top consulting job. many top colleges only have economics as a major, yet many of their grads still get a consulting job. it's about being able to nail the case interview (something that doesnt require a bizadmin background), having the academic strength to pull in a high GPA, and developing personal soft factors like leadership, communication, teamwork, etc., all of which are not taught in classrooms (and even if it were, it wouldnt really matter cuz employers value real-world experience instead).</p>
<p>This is also one thing that I need some advice with.
Some people say doing a Business Major as undergrad will help me in Graduate School because I will already have some background knowledge on its field.</p>
<p>On the other hand, many people also say that doing a Economics Major is more useful because then I wouldn't just be focused on one concentration of area (business) that I will study in graduate school anyway, and having some economics background knowledge will help me apply some of its concept to combine it with Business, thus providing me with better insight on its concept. </p>
<p>What's your take on that? (this is for everyone)</p>
<p>Also, kfc4u, if your point is that experience in jobs and internship is where I'll be doing all the REAL learnings for business, then are you basically saying that the Undergrad Business Program for any universities is totally useless?</p>
<p>Most undergrad programs (excluding the sciences) are useless as far as job-preparation goes.</p>
<p>Theory is great, but if you can't apply the concepts and build some specific skills, you aren't employable. Doesn't matter if you want to go into consulting or advertising or sociology. Anyone can memorize stuff out of a book.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Also, kfc4u, if your point is that experience in jobs and internship is where I'll be doing all the REAL learnings for business, then are you basically saying that the Undergrad Business Program for any universities is totally useless?
[/quote]
</p>
<p>no definitely not saying that. i'm just saying that high caliber students at colleges that only offer economics can compete in the job market with high caliber students who majored in business. doesnt mean undergrad business is totally useless at all. what i'm trying to say is that undergrad economics ISN'T useless or always undesirable compared to business. if it were, none of the econ grads from harvard, stanford, princeton, yale, etc. would be getting jobs in business. (i hope you understand this)</p>
<p>
[quote]
What's your take on that?
[/quote]
</p>
<p>your major wont really matter for MBA. there's a good percentage of MBA students who majored in engineering or the liberal arts. and the rest of the students are roughly divided between business and economics. you can post in the MBA Forum on this website and see what feedback you get. i think you'll get support for both sides, and i think ultimately it doesnt really matter. it's your work experience that matters most. that's just my take on it.</p>