Last minute decision! UCLA applied math VS UCSB actuarial science

SDGoldenBear
Tue, 03 May 2016 17:40:37 +0000

Applied Math at UCLA is indeed more versatile for a career, but are you willing to accept having the majority of your courses deal with theoretical math instead of the applied content you seem to be looking for? (The likely GPA drop as well?)

A lot of people don’t realize how removed theoretical math is from the computational and practical math they learned in the lower division courses.

Compare the curriculum:

https://www.math.ucla.edu/ugrad/majors/applied-mathematics-major
http://catalog.registrar.ucla.edu/uclacatalog2015-16-455.htm
http://catalog.registrar.ucla.edu/uclacatalog2015-16-739.htm

vs.

http://www.pstat.ucsb.edu/instruction/Actuarial-Science-BS-2015.pdf
https://my.sa.ucsb.edu/catalog/Current/CollegesDepartments/ls-intro/stats.aspx?DeptTab=Courses
https://my.sa.ucsb.edu/catalog/Current/CollegesDepartments/ls-intro/econ.aspx?DeptTab=Courses

UCLA won’t offer any outright economics courses and your only exposure to financial mathematics are your four upper division electives which are the same as the Financial / Actuarial majors (Math 170-174). Your core classes (Math 115, 131, 142) are based on theoretical analysis rather than financial modeling. VEE courses will be an issue and a lot of extracurricular studying will probably be needed to prepare for the actuary tests.

UCSB on the other hand requires you to take the traditional financial mathematics courses needed (PSTAT 170-172) as core classes and leaves your electives open for whatever specialty your looking for. Depending on your class choice, you could meet the vast majority of your VEE requirements and could be in good shape for the P, FM, and MFE exams without a need for outside study.

It’s a case of versatile degree vs. versatile curriculum. UCLA should be a favorite, but UCSB has it’s merits if you made up your mind about pursing a career in finance.