<p>Yea, I did it on purpose tho; the class was English 1A, which is required for everyone UC or CSU, and thereby attracted an interesting group of students which all seemed to think since they caught this morning's headlines on foxnews, they were adequately informed --which is like nails on a chalkboard for me (especially due to my major). And it didn't help that the discussions always wound up focused on topical issues and dumbed down abstractions of intricate world matters (think arm chair general), which then implanted a certain false sense of acumen in the fresh-out-of-highschool-students.</p>
<p>I haven't transfered yet, but I'm living 5 minutes away from UCLA, in the UCLA dorms, and I'm studying and living together with 80% UCLA students. I absolutely haven't made the same experiences as dhl3. What you are saying may be true for Econ majors (and maybe only Econ), but certainly not for all other majors. And let's be honest, Econ/Business classes at a CC are a joke anyway, maybe that's why it seem so much harder to you.</p>
<p>Some people are studying ONLY during midterms/finals week and they still get good grades. The average study time here seems to be much less than mine (I'm an engineering major and taking 20units only math/physics) and the one of Ektaylor. Hell, the average study time is less than 1/3 of mine.</p>
<p>So, please don't generalize. I'm not saying that you are wrong regarding Econ, but you are definitely wrong when you start talking about all majors in general.</p>
<p>Wasn't generalizing. Just giving people what to expect once they transfer. And seriously, average study time = 1/3 of cc student's? Either your friends are taking some BS class with some easy prof, or you are overkilling the cc studyload.</p>
<p>I haven't met anyone here that actually devoted less time studying than I was when I was in CC. The study time i put in when I was at CC is expected to be the bare minimum to PASS the class here.</p>
<p>Ektaylor, do you or did you go to PCC?</p>
<p>No, I go to Cuesta College in SLO.</p>
<p>
[quote]
hey dhl,</p>
<p>for business econ what do you think i should do</p>
<p>go to a lower tier UC school like UCI and dominate over there with a rly high GPA</p>
<p>or take ur chances at UCLA and try to perform well and risk a lower GPA but I guess have a chance for better recruitment?</p>
<p>i would say i am big time slacker eventhough I performed really well at JC, but I am starting to have doubts of whether I will realistically be able to handle UCLA</p>
<p>let me know
[/quote]
</p>
<p>ahh i guess gpa doesn't really matter right, b/c when you graduate, the degree is all it matter. and about wheter going to UCLA or UCI, i think LA have more a reputation, so it's always benefit, but then it doesn't really matter at the same time, b/c my brother graduated from UCR and at the company he's working for, there ppl taht graduated from UCLA, they ended up working for teh same company, not sure about thier pay difference though xP</p>
<p>GPA matters if you want to go for some high-calibar industry like Consulting or IBanking (these industries want your GPA to be at least 3.5) and/or if you want to get into Big 4 Accounting firms (also 3.5 min.). And let's not forget about grad. schools.</p>
<p>The question is, I never really know who recruits at UCI or any of the mid-/lower UCs. But UCLA keeps tight relationship between all of the Big 4 firms, consulting firms (BC, Deloitte, Hitachi) and even some of the higher Ibanks (Goldman Sachs, Lehman) and the reps frequently speak at the events and always show up in career fair. So I guess if you go to UCLA, you will surely have opportunities opend up for you, but that's if you have high GPA. Seriously, 90% of econ/bizecon/accounting students want to get into these three industires, your GPA will have to stand out from the rest (which means 3.5 can often be inadequate) and have had superior leadership/activities to get the interview.</p>
<p>hay dhl u r so cool</p>
<p>and being a bruin makes me infinitely cooler than you'll ever be ;)</p>
<p>
[QUOTE]
Wasn't generalizing. Just giving people what to expect once they transfer. And seriously, average study time = 1/3 of cc student's? Either your friends are taking some BS class with some easy prof, or you are overkilling the cc studyload.
[/QUOTE]
Well, you said that pretty much all UCLA students study the same amount Ektaylor does (~ 40h/week outside the classroom). This is what I don't think to be true. For almost all people I know it's much less, except maybe during finals week.</p>
<p>I didn't mean/say that UCLA students have an average study time of 1/3 of CC students in general, but most people I know study only about 1/3 of the time I do (which is similiar to Ektaylor's).</p>
<p>It's been a while since I posted here, but I wanted to share my experience as an econ major (one I think contrasts with dhl3's). I'm an Econ/Int'l Area Studies major at UCLA and I would say classes are definitely harder than my CC, but not unreasonably so. I'm kind of a slacker (I'm here to avoid studying for my Econ 101 (Bet you're in that class too, eh dhl3?)) but I got As/Bs last quarter, and look to be getting about the same this quarter. I'm hoping to get an A in Econ 101 (yeah, should probably go finish those study questions), but honestly, at this point, I just want to do decently and finish school, so Bs in weeder classes are acceptable.</p>
<p>Bear in mind, those econ-hopefuls for UCLA: you're in the pre-major for the first one to three quarters (depending on major), and have to get a 2.5 to 3.5 (again, depending on major) to officially declare. But once you're in the major, I believe you only need a 2.0. So, don't worry, take things as they come. It's completely doable (though the 3.5 for Bus Econ majors does seem to be hard--if you can't swing it, do straight econ with an accounting minor). My friend just got an A with Ravedge, or however it's spelled, so it's all doable.</p>
<p>I hope this was useful for someone...</p>
<p>Sure, if you are aiming for a B, UCLA studyload may not be hard at all.</p>
<p>Um, I aim for As, but I'm okay with the fact that I have a 3.4 or whatever. Like I said, I'm working for an A in 101--got an A on the first midterm. It's not worth beating yourself up if you miss an A by a half point. It sucks, but what can you do about it? You still get the diploma.</p>
<p>I'll contribute to this thread since i know many of you want to know what it's like after the transfer process. I know i was one of those people too who was dying to know what it would be like after transferring into the uc's. My experience at ucla is more similar to dhl3's experience. I had a decent gpa from cc (3.86) and then a 3.1 my first quarter here. I'm a physiological science major here.</p>
<p>One of the many questions that i know people will ask and i asked the same question too back then was whether the classes are a lot harder/impossible. After you transfer you will mainly be taking upper division classes unless you have lower div classes you need to make up. Upper division classes here cannot be compared to the classes you have taken at cc bc those are lower division classes. Upper division classes are in general harder than lower division classes. However, I did make up lower division bio (ls 3 and ls 4) here. What i've noticed is that the material is pretty much the same here compared to cc. But the main difference is the test. The test are harder here. They put more critical thinking questions and make it more harder than necessary in order to test how much you know the stuff. So not only do you need to memorize the stuff but also learn how to apply it. The ls series here are consider weeder classes here, so i advise life science majors to try to complete you bio series before you transfer. It'll make your life a lot easier after you transfer. </p>
<p>Another difference here is that ucla is on the quarter system. I was used to cc's semester system. Bc of that you have to study a lot more and more frequently. Otherwise you'll get behind. Also once midterm starts you basically keep studying all the way til the end of the final. But i actually like the quarter system better because classes end faster. </p>
<p>One of the big difference that i've experience here is the grading and the testing. You are graded on a curve so you are competing against other people. Your grade is based on how well the class does not how well you do. And if your a science major the average is curved to a b-/c+. I think the curve is better for north campus majors. Testing wise, it's a lot more critical thinking and more conceptual and even abstract stuff (like i had a crossword puzzle on my physiology midterm...that was a wth moment). But it does hone your critical thinking skills. Grading wise, the ta's are really picky. If your answer can be used as a key to the test then you get full credit. Otherwise, partial credit. You have to be precise and specific in your short answer/essay questions in order to get full credit. I remember in cc even if i gave a generic answer i still got full credit.</p>
<p>But yea other than those differences, I'm having a great time at ucla. I love my major and what i study. Sure it's hard and at least for me i have to study a lot, but it's not impossible. If anyone has questions about the physci major you can ask me.</p>
<p>i had a roommate who was a poli sci major and she was also a transfer student. She seemed to do all right (2a's and a B first quarter and that b was from a psych class), but for her the main difference was a lot more reading and more papers to do.</p>
<p>thanks a lot, sakura, for sharing your experience at UCLA. I'd love to hear from some psyc majors out there, also, since it's one of the most popular majors (and it's mine, too!)</p>
<p>I just wanted to post here to give my impression after the first quarter too, didnt see any history majors posting</p>
<p>I had a 3.4 at CC and i got a 3.567 or something my first quarter here at UCLA. The classes were way different, the time frame much faster but once you adjust to the speed of the quarter system it all kind of falls into place. </p>
<p>For me, its not the studying that takes up my time, its the reading for courses. its seems that generally <em>disclaimer</em>...GENERALLY, north campus majors (english, history, poli sci, psych, philosophy, etc etc etc) have to spend much more time reading rather than studying, because generally, north campus majors have the traditional midterm, few essays and a final and maybe a project or 2. </p>
<p>South campus (science majors, engineering, mathematics, etc etc etc) seem to have much more studying / hw to be done. Problem sets are constantly being assigned, they can have 2 or 3 midterms, quizes, a final, and projects, etc. The people i know in econ are always studying, and Ravatech (sp?) is brutal. Be prepared to have a nervous breakdown.</p>
<p>For me, and most of the people i've met in my classes who are north campus majors, its 2 or maybe 3 hours a day reading, an hour of misc. other class work during the normal weeks. Midterms can be harsh depending on the teacher, a few solid days of pure studying though and you should be ok, again its different person to person. Finals week is similar, just more studying obviously. </p>
<p>I wake up, go to class, get food, come back and nap. start reading, eat dinner, hang out, read more, do assignments, sleep, rinse, repeat. in between I see friends etc, play games, practice guitar, but you get the general idea. some people are slow essay writers, and that can really be a killer as a north campus major. My final for a class this quarter is a 25 page paper, and throughout the quarter quite a few 5 page ones (considered more or less the usual length). If you can get a 5 page paper done in a day or two, you better work on being able to do so, because if you are north campus major, chances are you will see a lot of them.</p>
<p>If anyone has specific questions about Cal's College of Natural Resources, send me a PM. If you have one specifically for Environmental Econ/Policy, let me know also.</p>
<p>thanks for the info, strongergodzilla. your info really makes me feel better about the transfer.</p>
<p>strongergodzilla, how are the mid terms spaced out. Is it assigned by the the department for is it the teachers discretion? At the JC I go to(deanza), I sometimes have to take exams every week because my teachers usually has 3 mid terms all one week ahead of the other. Sometimes I just feel like winging it. The idea of studying all the time frightens me.</p>
<p>dhl3,
I was reading your posts and laughing to myself because I feel the exact same way here at Cal so I'm guessing all the UC's are like that. I remember about a year ago reading reviews on Yelp for Berkeley from previous students and one student made a comment that when he was in CC he was always happy to get his A's but when he got to Cal he was excited when he got his B's and relieved in a couple of classes to get C's. I remember being pretty sure of myself and thinking these people don't study like I do so I'm going to do just as well in the UC as I did at the CC. I was in for a huge adjustment that first semester and now I understand what those students were talking about. This semester has been great (much better that my first semester) but it took that first semester to wake me up to reality that it is way different than my lower division classes at the CC. I also agree with previous posts that its an insane amount of reading, that really takes a lot of discipline to keep on track. Actually, I can't imagine being on a quarter system as its difficult enough on a semester system.</p>