Why does everyone consider UCLA to be the second UC?

Colleges and Universities A-Z University of California - GENERAL
1

<p>–UC Berkeley - Founded in 1868 with a merger of College of California as the University of California (UC)
<a href=“History & discoveries | University of California, Berkeley”>History & discoveries | University of California, Berkeley</a>
–UCSF - Founded in 1873 with a merger of Toland Medical College as UC’s medical school
<a href=“http://history.library.ucsf.edu/story.html[/url]”>http://history.library.ucsf.edu/story.html</a>
–UC Davis - Founded in 1905 as UC’s farm
<a href=“http://facts.ucdavis.edu/general_statistics.lasso[/url]”>http://facts.ucdavis.edu/general_statistics.lasso</a>
–UC Riverside - Founded in 1907 as UC’s citrus station
<a href=“http://www.ucr.edu/about/history.html[/url]”>http://www.ucr.edu/about/history.html</a>
–UCLA - Founded in 1919 as UC’s southern branch
<a href=“http://www.ucla.edu/about.html[/url]”>http://www.ucla.edu/about.html</a></p>

<p>They all started as some short of branch from Berkeley, so why does everyone consider UCLA to be the second UC?</p>

2

<p>UCLA is considered the second UC in rankings and in the overall opinion of quality of instruction.</p>

3

<p>Thank you. I was under the impression that UCLA was the second founding member of the UC system. I learn something new everyday! I am actually proud of all of my university’s branches.</p>

4

<p>More on the origins and history of UCLA:
[Welcome[/url</a>]
[url=&lt;a href=“http://sunsite.berkeley.edu/~ucalhist/general_history/campuses/ucla/index.html]University”&gt;http://sunsite.berkeley.edu/~ucalhist/general_history/campuses/ucla/index.html]University</a> of California History Digital Archives](<a href=“http://www.uclahistoryproject.ucla.edu/Timeline/default.asp]Welcome[/url”>http://www.uclahistoryproject.ucla.edu/Timeline/default.asp)</p>

5

<p>Interesting, so, the Westwood campus was dedicated in 1925. I did not know that. But, I did know that UCLA started out as SJSU’s southern branch as well. It seems that UCLA lacks history, because of its youth. Especially, when you compare the history behind Stanford 1891 (Stanford family), Berkeley 1868 (first public research university in CA), and USC 1880 (first private research university in CA).</p>

<p>Poor, UCLA. It was never a flagship of anything. Well, at least it has a decent reputation.</p>

6

<p>Note that Davis did not become a four-year degree granting institution until 1922, after the Southern Branch started.</p>

<p>Riverside did not open Arts & Sciences until 1954…</p>

<p>Thus, Southern Branch was the #2 UC undergrad college.</p>

7

<p>BayBoi: you spend way too much time belittling UCLA. This attitude is in most of your posts. Where does the bitterness come from?</p>

8

<p>I don’t see where you thought I was belittling UCLA. I like UCLA. It is an amazing school. It is also completely over hyped on CC, which is hilarious to me. </p>

<p>Go Bears!</p>

9

<p>Likewise, I don’t see where anyone ever thought UCLA was the “2nd UC”. It IS however commonly portrayed 2nd in ranks among UC’s such as in USNWR… It might just have been you, BayBoi10, who was confused.</p>

<p>It’s not overhyped at all, this public college helps serve Los Angeles, one of the largest cities in the United States. It’s no wonder why it gets so much attention. And that’s not even hilarious.</p>

10

<p>It may have been just me. But, regardless, just because UCLA caters to LA does not mean it is an elite institution. </p>

<p><a href=“http://img.■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■/albums/v406/royrules22/kendricks_fucla2.png[/url]”>http://img.■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■/albums/v406/royrules22/kendricks_fucla2.png&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

<p>… and never forget your roots.</p>

<p><a href=“http://www.history.ucla.edu/people/alumni/home.gif[/url]”>http://www.history.ucla.edu/people/alumni/home.gif&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;