Transfer to UCLA or USC

b_boy
Mon, 10 Sep 2007 23:10:18 +0000

In your first post you attack me in your first sentence, by pointing out that I was rejected from Cal and UCLA, and had to settle for something inferior, USC. You don’t know how to sense the context of what others are saying. You’re rash.

This is what I got to say. We’re in the “transfer” forums, so we can assume that everyone here is a transfer. There is no glory in transferring to the “major leagues” from a jr. college, and this implies that I fall in this category as well. So why were you so offended by it? Or defensive about it? I must have struck a nerve with you.

I’m not patronizing others in these forums. But I can’t stand it when people brag about getting into Cal or UCLA from a jr. college, especially when they knock USC, or pursue unchallenging majors. Big deal! The transition from jr. college to “competitive” university is easier than high school to “competitive” university, I’m not even going to get into this because you know it’s true.

If you have any logic, I said in my first post here that schools’ academic reputations are determined by the kinds of researchers they can draw in, and many other reasons as well. Who cares that a university has top-notch researchers when none of their loftiness will rub off on you? This is analogous to benchwarmers who brag about their football team winning championships. Who cares? You didn’t participate in the plays or contribute to the win.

To address the “politically swayed” issue, universities have always used arbitrary and un-objective means to win the favor of public view. This is true in all institutions from all walks of life. You posting that link shows you’re gullible, and take things at face value. It’s hard to convince people like you of the truth. Since I’m a business major, I follow articles in Business Week frequently. Recently, university heads were angry at US News and Business Week rankings, stirring up a controversy of how politically swayed and unfair they were.

I can take differing opinions. I’m not mad that the 2 flagship UC schools rejected me. I tried to get into some very competitive programs, and I don’t have a “sour grapes” attitude over those who got accepted. Why don’t you look for my other posts in different forums and read what I wrote about Cal? Why don’t you consider the simple math about Cal and UCLA each receiving 13,000+ applications from transfers each year, and USC about 8,500 in the same manner? These are some huge disparities.

Last thing, before I “hammer nail in the coffin,” that “top 10” or “top 20” mumbo-jumbo about Cal and UCLA’s undergrad programs are a joke my “friend.” I have many friends and acquaintances who are alumni of UCLA and Cal’s undergrad programs. They all have disillusioned, discontented, and somewhat bitter feelings about their experience as undergraduates from these two schools. They all tell me that after graduation you end up with nothing, in other words they’re unemployed despite them studying under a school with such “prestigious” academic programs. And no, I never insinuated that USC is an absolutely better school than Cal or UCLA. I’m aware that Cal and UCLA both have longer standing legacies of academic “prestige” over USC. Here’s the true anecdote as to why USC revamped their academic reputation from their previous “university of spoiled children” stigma: 1994 USC vs. Cal at football, Cal was getting their asses to handed to them by a 60-point deficit, 4th quarter USC fans were gloating at Cal’s loss, Cal fans retorted back by saying we got 11 Nobel Laureates you guys got none, this was blow to USC’s ego, from this point forth Steven Sample of USC decided to “buy” researchers so that USC would no longer hold the stigma of dumb-dumb school where you can buy your way in. George Olaf: Nobel Prize winning chemist at USC. You don’t even understand or comprehend the social dynamics of why a university is deemed elite. Whatevers….I can take a different opinion.