Turning down UCLA and UCB

<p>Hey all... Just wondering if anyone here is planning to turn down UCLA or UCB for a less prestigious UC? Personally I decided to turn down both for UCI. Most people think it's crazy but I can't get over the campus, having my car close, being practically on the beach (not as close as UCSB, but close enough for me) and the abundance of research opportunities that seem to be floating around with professors in subjects that are very interesting to me (namely nutritional anthropology and the "McDonaldization of the world"). </p>

<p>So are you planning to turn down one or both? For which school and why?</p>

<p>it only really matters if the program you want to focus in is way better at one university than at another. For example, i got into both UCSD and UCLA and UCLA was ranked 9 whereas UCSD was ranked 21. Not to mention that i was already living in LA at the time and saw little reason to go to san diego all things considered. Don't listen to what anyone else says, make the decision that you feel will be the best one, and if you work hard you'll be sure to flourish.</p>

it only really matters if the program you want to focus in is way better at one university than at another.


<p>not necessarily true. if you ever go outside of california to attempt to secure a job, employers get wet over seeing applicants from UCLA and UC Berkeley.</p>


<p>The UCLA and Berkeley names DO matter. If you're goal is grad school then they're not so important, but as been said UCLA and Berkeley carry recognition outside of California that none of the other UC's do. Both of my parents were telling me to pick UCLA for that reason (both of them are Davis grads) and even though that isn't what pushed UCLA over the edge for me (visiting the campus did that) it is nice to know that I'll have the brand recognition wherever I go when I apply for jobs.</p>

<p>I was REALLY close to picking Davis due to the fact that it's close to home, very laid back and I feel the only challenge I would face there would be my course work. So in a way it's kind of lucky I fell in love with the campus and atmosphere at UCLA as UCLA is much better ranked for my major. </p>

<p>So yeah, honestly the UCLA and Berkeley brands are important, though it is still probably more important to go where you want to go and feel you will thrive. I'm just lucky that turned out to coincide with LA for me.</p>

... it is still probably more important to go where you want to go and feel you will thrive.


<p>i've seen this advice get peddled along by just about everyone i can think of.. to me, it sounds like BS. there's no accurate way by which to measure your future on-campus success.. you're taking a risk in choosing to attend one school over the others - end of story. why not make your decision primarily based on faculty over other considerations? i mean, the extra curricular stuff will be pretty standard across the board; same with the social scene (you'll find it if you seek it); same with research opportunities... the only real consideration that i can see as holding much weight in addition to quality of instruction / branding is CLIMATE. i mean, sure, i'd have functioned in Berkeley, but waking up day after winter day to warm sunshine in LA... you can't beat that ****, and, i promise, it can make the biggest difference on your mood.</p>

<p>TL;DR; if you're going to thrive at all, you'll thrive regardless of where you go, so go to 1st, the best; and 2nd, the sunniest school you get into.</p>

<p>Well I believe you just proved a point I believe in: everyone has at least one factor that they consider to be extremely important to them (almost rivaling prestige), whether it be finances, architecture, parking, dorm options, proximity to home or even climate. For some people, a better "name" on a degree is not enough to make it more desirable than a school that meets more criteria. Depends on the person's wish list I guess...</p>

<p>hahahahahahhahahaahaha "get wet"</p>



<p>sorry, but i don't. I've generally heard this argued by people who simply go on their preconceived notions, but i've yet to see any evidence for it. Grad schools don't distinguish between probably all the UCs (maybe with the exception of merced) and if you're going into the workforce you'd probably have little advantage. UCLA's name recognition only caries significant power internationally. In the states, in the job market at least, the UCs are still state schools and in general would be seen as inferior to those of the ivies or the top-tier non ivies (e.g. Caltech, MIT, UChicago, etc.) unless the programs that the UCs offered were seen as top in their field (e.g. berkeley for computer science/engineering)</p>

<p>as counterintuitive as it may seem, for employers there'd be little difference between UCI and Cal/UCLA unless it was in a specialty program (e.g. UCLA for film, or UCB for Eng/CS)</p>

as been said UCLA and Berkeley carry recognition outside of California that none of the other UC's do.


<p>sure, but that still doesn't mean much when they're compared with other schools like caltech, stanford, harvey-mudd, etc. There's plenty of good schools everywhere, with higher endowments, and smaller class sizes, more rigorous programs, more research opportunities, and equal quality professors as the UCs.</p>

<p>Sure more people may know of UCLA than, let's say, Dartmouth. That doesn't mean that UCLA is a better school than Darthmouth though, even if it caries the name recognition that Dartmouth lacks.</p>

<p>I may turn down both (including a full ride at UCLA) and USC for cal poly slo (and my major is not engineering or architecture). I'm just not a city person and sure I bet could adapt for the "name recognition" but.. I think ten years down the line I'm not going to regret going where I feel more comfortable and healthy. </p>

<p>It's kind of weird to think I may have gone this far to end up at cal poly, but at least I know that I was able to achieve it if nothing else.</p>

<p>I turned down UCLA for UCSC. prestige is more important for your grad degree compared to your undergrad. As long as you have the grades and the mcat/LSAT/GREs you'll get into any grad school you wish. The reason I turned down UCLA is because it's to close to my house(about half an hour with traffic).</p>

<p>I'm turning down full rides to UC Berkeley and UCLA to attend UCI.</p>

<p>Had this been 4 or 5 years ago and I was a single young buck, I'd go to either UCLA or UCB in a heartbeat. But now, since I have a family and a certain health issue that just arose, I am pretty much restricted to going to UCI.</p>

<p>And yeah, everyone keeps calling me crazy. But they're 19 years old and still have those starry eyes. I tell them it's a good enough place to get me into medical school.</p>

<p>Anyways. I guess I'll have to destroy the competition (or lack thereof :)) at UCI when I transfer this fall.</p>

<p>I would turn down UCB and UCLA for UCD. If I transferred to UCLA, I'd have to take ANOTHER Stats course and I hate all mathematics. UCLA and and UCB also seem very competitive and I'd rather be a big fish in a little pond over at Davis, so sue me. </p>

<p>I can't predict the future but I think I'd have a way easier time keeping a high GPA at Davis than Cal or UCLA. I need a high GPA to apply to law schools, THEN I'd consider UCLA or Cal for my JD. No math in law school = a blessing. (If they'd consider me that is ;) )</p>

<p>I would've turned down Cal for UCI but they waitlisted me T_T and now my only options are Cal and UCR lol.</p>

<p>If you are going to pick UCI because you genuinely feel it will be the best place for you to thrive, and in your heart of hearts you know it is your dream school, and you are sure you will be happiest with that decision 5, 10, 20 years down the road in your life, and the only reason you question not taking UCLA/CAL is because of "name recognition", then I say 100% go to UCI.</p>

<p>If you are just hedging because you are afraid to leave home/leave your comfort zone, and making excuses to not take a huge and scary step in your life, then I promise you that you will regret not going to UCLA/CAL for the rest of your life.</p>

<p>"I promise you that you will regret not going to UCLA/CAL for the rest of your life."</p>


<p>@hayward - .......too bad you left out that first part of Berkeleyorbust's sentence in your little quote. He's 100% right in saying that people shouldn't make excuses to get out of taking risks because they're afraid. If the ONLY reason a person doesn't go to Cal/UCLA is because they're chicken **** then there's a problem. And hell yeah, they could end up seriously regretting it, either immediately or down the road.
Quoting part of the whole is misleading, and you just completely twisted what he's saying.</p>

<p>yeesh, not sure why that made me so angry ahahahah probably because I didnt take my xanax today</p>

<p>Ugh. I think that choosing a school simply because of its supposed "prestige" is obnoxious, ESPECIALLY within the University of California system. I could understand considering prestige if the debate was between Stanford and San Francisco State or something, but we're talking about two UC's here. They're ALL supposed to be excellent. But because a disparate number of top applicants head to UCLA and Berkeley simply for the name recognition, the gap gets bigger and bigger. It's not cool. I'm headed to UC Irvine in the fall and I'm excited about it. It's a great school and it's the BEST choice for my major. But if I hear one person whine about how they're only there because they didn't get into UCLA, I'll probably b****-slap them. </p>

<p>I agree that there are a lot of considerations when it comes to choosing a school. And I know this has already been said, but: if you're going to grad school, do you think ANYONE is honestly going to care where your undergrad was? No. I firmly believe that a B.A. from Cal would not land me any job that I couldn't get with a B.A. from UC Irvine. And it really annoys me when people (meaning parents, adults, or fellow students) make others feel "less than" because they're choosing to go to one UC over another. It only reinforces the notion that two of the UC's are Ivy equivalents while the rest are Cal State equivalents-- and oh, yeah, it makes applicants feel crappy about themselves.</p>


<p>I turned down Cal econ last year to go to UCI(didn't get into UCLA Biz Econ), Don't regret it at all. </p>

<p>Gotta say my experience with UCI so far has been extremely positive. Loved all my teachers except one, test are challenging but not overwhelmingly difficult, class are easy to pass ,but hard to get an A.</p>

<p>My Gpa at C.C was ~3.86 , gpa at UCI is ~3.66 so about a .2 drop.</p>

<p>Love the flexibility and availability of classes, it allows me time to finish a minor in the two years as well.</p>

<p>Research opportunities are plenty with a department at UCI dedicated to undergraduate research, Internships are plentiful also in the Irvine area with research park nearby and big accounting firms like deloitee,PWC,Ernest & Young nearby and recruiting directly from UCI. </p>

<p>Personally i'm doing an internship at Experian in Costa Mesa this summer and have enjoyed my first year here.</p>

<p>p.s no one whines about not getting in Cal or UCLA here, at least from the people i've met</p>


<p>I just like UCD better. </p>

<p>I already have an off-campus apartment that I'm eyeballing (La Salle Apartments), I've already semi-made a schedule (transferring with 102 Quarter units, only going to need 78 to graduate :D ), and I'll be 3 hours away from my parents. I will have finished all prereqs for UCD and I prefer the laid-back/chill vibe of their campus. Berkeley's on the semester system and I don't want my classes to drag out like that. Also, I'm not a fan of the cluster**** of homeless people roaming around lol. </p>

<p>I'm trying to get in and get out with a BA and as little stress as possible.</p>

<p>It seems like people on College Confidential are ridiculously critical of most schools in the state system. Though those within my major or a comparable major (science/engineering in general) strive to go to a UC for opportunistic purposes as opposed to going to a CSU, plenty of other students are happy with whatever school they get into. It sucks when you see posts about someone trying to find out more information about their school and another person responds with a comment that's set out to make the OP seem inferior. I'm not going to say that I'm not guilty of this sometimes too, but I genuinely try to be realistic. After all, let's face it, we do live in a world of commercialism that's distributed among not only products, but people. I would want to go to the best school for my education (which often coincides with the "higher ranked" schools) to boost my personal contribution-to-society value and make myself a marketable candidate for job prospects. The type of people that tend to post on here are somewhat invested in their education, which is why they are seeking out information in the first place. This, in turn, drives the consensual attitude toward making school preferences based on what is "acceptable" among their peers. Hello high school all over again. The only thing that really sets schools apart is establishment. Cal and UCLA attract a different array of candidates than a CSU because their name is nationally recognizable.</p>

<p>What does that stem from? In the late 1800s, one man wanted to create a school on the West Coast that was comparable to Yale. Another guy said that they should make it a state school. Lo and behold, Berkeley (#1) was the result which is arguably a direct hybrid of those two ideas. In addition, it was agreed that they should aim at enrolling the top graduates from high schools as opposed to the already implemented state university system (what would be the CSU system). Next, they moved down to socal and turned an ALREADY ESTABLISHED state school into a Cal campus and this shortly became UCLA (#2) in the 1920s. For the most part, the rest of the campuses were initially just more branches of Cal (in relation to farming, etc) but they weren't even established as their own campuses until the mid 1900s (not counting UCM). You can look at this UC structure like a chain restaurant. If you build it in a viable location, it will probably have more of a chance to thrive (SD, SB, I) and if you don't, the school might have to think of other ways to draw in business. Some schools have successfully done this, (ie. Davis) and some are still just on the path. Regardless, the establishment of these schools are what draws in professors, which is what draws in students, which is what draws in competition, & this is what plays a part in making distinctions between campuses.</p>