What is UCLA really like...

[Anonymous]

I’m just one person and this is just one opinion. I’ve always been wary of “hot” or popular urban schools such as UCLA or NYU. Many students may be there to pursue a specific academic interest and take advantage of professional opportunities in the surrounding city, and that’s understandable. However, the ones who are drawn in by the brand name and exciting location alone without having a deeper reason to attend worry me more. I’d rather pay the $90,000 a year to an SLAC.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I’m just one person and this is just one opinion. I’ve always been wary of “hot” or popular urban schools such as UCLA or NYU. Many students may be there to pursue a specific academic interest and take advantage of professional opportunities in the surrounding city, and that’s understandable. However, the ones who are drawn in by the brand name and exciting location alone without having a deeper reason to attend worry me more. I’d rather pay the $90,000 a year to an SLAC.

You have a strange conclusion…there are plenty of flagships that aren’t “hot” or in urban locations.

Why is the alternative a tiny school in a likely freezing location (though admittedly maybe it’s one of the Claremont’s).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m just one person and this is just one opinion. I’ve always been wary of “hot” or popular urban schools such as UCLA or NYU. Many students may be there to pursue a specific academic interest and take advantage of professional opportunities in the surrounding city, and that’s understandable. However, the ones who are drawn in by the brand name and exciting location alone without having a deeper reason to attend worry me more. I’d rather pay the $90,000 a year to an SLAC.

You have a strange conclusion…there are plenty of flagships that aren’t “hot” or in urban locations.

Why is the alternative a tiny school in a likely freezing location (though admittedly maybe it’s one of the Claremont’s).

Also, UCLA and NYU have been “hot” for at least 20 years now. At some point it stops being hot and just is what it is.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In term of ability to get the classes you want, size of classes, being taught by professors versus TAs, and social life,, is it frat heavy? do kids live in dorms after freshman year... any and all insight would be appreciated. I went to a small college where we built community quickly and naturally in the dorms and I never once had a TA, so the possibility of sending my DD to a university with 33K undergrad is a strange new world to me.

it is like going to school in SE Asia…

LA and California is hugely Asian. If you are from DC, the large Asian population may feel shocking.

UCLA Undergrad:
35% Asian
22% Hispanic
6.5% Black
25% White

Then it is good that California prides itself in making their Universities match their Population Profile….(NOT)

39.4% Hispanic
34.7% White
16.1% Asian
5.7% Black

These are the kids who accepted, right? Because they can’t track the distribution of admitted students. So you’re looking at who wants to attend, not how well the school tried to match demographics (which, again, they can’t).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:DD is a freshman OOS. Really loving it. Has twi roommates she is great friends with. Chose them. Does loads of fun things in LA. Hasn’t gotten all the classes she wanted but is expanding herself w things like Architecture and Urban Planning. There are lots of requirements in different areas. Got into a sorority but wasn’t her vibe, so dropped out. Hasn’t affected social life. Lots of ways to be there w/o being Greek. I went to small liberal arts college I liked, but this is much more expansive experience. She’s learned to navigate the world. It was a great choice for her.

Good to hear!

- mother of an incoming freshman who also went to a SLAC and is having a hard time wrapping her brain around having a child attend such a large school

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I’m just one person and this is just one opinion. I’ve always been wary of “hot” or popular urban schools such as UCLA or NYU. Many students may be there to pursue a specific academic interest and take advantage of professional opportunities in the surrounding city, and that’s understandable. However, the ones who are drawn in by the brand name and exciting location alone without having a deeper reason to attend worry me more. I’d rather pay the $90,000 a year to an SLAC.

The same student who wants a big public flagship generally doesn’t want a SLAC though. And UCLA is kind of ideal for students who don’t know exactly what they want to do as most programs are strong across the board. I also think schools like UCLA and NYU are amazing for personal growth.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m just one person and this is just one opinion. I’ve always been wary of “hot” or popular urban schools such as UCLA or NYU. Many students may be there to pursue a specific academic interest and take advantage of professional opportunities in the surrounding city, and that’s understandable. However, the ones who are drawn in by the brand name and exciting location alone without having a deeper reason to attend worry me more. I’d rather pay the $90,000 a year to an SLAC.

The same student who wants a big public flagship generally doesn’t want a SLAC though. And UCLA is kind of ideal for students who don’t know exactly what they want to do as most programs are strong across the board. I also think schools like UCLA and NYU are amazing for personal growth.

Except all the popular majors are impacted at UCLA, so good luck switching to one of those.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m just one person and this is just one opinion. I’ve always been wary of “hot” or popular urban schools such as UCLA or NYU. Many students may be there to pursue a specific academic interest and take advantage of professional opportunities in the surrounding city, and that’s understandable. However, the ones who are drawn in by the brand name and exciting location alone without having a deeper reason to attend worry me more. I’d rather pay the $90,000 a year to an SLAC.

The same student who wants a big public flagship generally doesn’t want a SLAC though. And UCLA is kind of ideal for students who don’t know exactly what they want to do as most programs are strong across the board. I also think schools like UCLA and NYU are amazing for personal growth.

Except all the popular majors are impacted at UCLA, so good luck switching to one of those.

Omg stop with the Debbie Downer routine!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m just one person and this is just one opinion. I’ve always been wary of “hot” or popular urban schools such as UCLA or NYU. Many students may be there to pursue a specific academic interest and take advantage of professional opportunities in the surrounding city, and that’s understandable. However, the ones who are drawn in by the brand name and exciting location alone without having a deeper reason to attend worry me more. I’d rather pay the $90,000 a year to an SLAC.

The same student who wants a big public flagship generally doesn’t want a SLAC though. And UCLA is kind of ideal for students who don’t know exactly what they want to do as most programs are strong across the board. I also think schools like UCLA and NYU are amazing for personal growth.

Except all the popular majors are impacted at UCLA, so good luck switching to one of those.

Omg stop with the Debbie Downer routine!

This is a thread on the pros and cons of UCLA. Impacted majors are a strong con, hard to get into prerequisite classes even if one gets the major.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I’m just one person and this is just one opinion. I’ve always been wary of “hot” or popular urban schools such as UCLA or NYU. Many students may be there to pursue a specific academic interest and take advantage of professional opportunities in the surrounding city, and that’s understandable. However, the ones who are drawn in by the brand name and exciting location alone without having a deeper reason to attend worry me more. I’d rather pay the $90,000 a year to an SLAC.

So you’d rather go to a rural location pay the same amount for a school with zero name recognition and where there are a dearth of professional opportunities??? Crazy take pp

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m just one person and this is just one opinion. I’ve always been wary of “hot” or popular urban schools such as UCLA or NYU. Many students may be there to pursue a specific academic interest and take advantage of professional opportunities in the surrounding city, and that’s understandable. However, the ones who are drawn in by the brand name and exciting location alone without having a deeper reason to attend worry me more. I’d rather pay the $90,000 a year to an SLAC.

So you’d rather go to a rural location pay the same amount for a school with zero name recognition and where there are a dearth of professional opportunities??? Crazy take pp

Not so crazy. UCLA isn’t nirvana and neither is the rural SLAC. The point of this thread is to discuss the pros and cons of UCLA instead of completely bashing one choice over another.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m just one person and this is just one opinion. I’ve always been wary of “hot” or popular urban schools such as UCLA or NYU. Many students may be there to pursue a specific academic interest and take advantage of professional opportunities in the surrounding city, and that’s understandable. However, the ones who are drawn in by the brand name and exciting location alone without having a deeper reason to attend worry me more. I’d rather pay the $90,000 a year to an SLAC.

The same student who wants a big public flagship generally doesn’t want a SLAC though. And UCLA is kind of ideal for students who don’t know exactly what they want to do as most programs are strong across the board. I also think schools like UCLA and NYU are amazing for personal growth.

Except all the popular majors are impacted at UCLA, so good luck switching to one of those.

Those entering as freshmen at UCLA can switch majors pretty easily. They prohibit major switching for transfers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My experience is that the study body segregates based on identity so people hang out with people like themselves. It's not a cohesive community.

I think this is a weird comment to make about UCLA specifically because I've never been in a community where this isn't the case (my college, my jobs, church, my kids' schools, etc). It's human nature for people to segregate based on identity. It is very hard if not impossible to get authentic mixing of cultures and races on any sort of large scale.

I'd attended a smaller university before UCLA and students of all backgrounds joined groups and socialized based on interests. There were dance groups, outdoors clubs, chess clubs, triathlon clubs, etc. At UCLA, every group started with identity and not interests. Even lab partners wouldn't speak with each other if they weren't of the same background. I found it super weird.

Even student elections were all about getting other students of your religion/culture/race/heritage to turn out to vote for the candidate of the same background to push resources towards those students groups. It was super divisive.

Were you a transfer to UCLA? How recently did you attend?

I was a graduate student. My experience is that UCLA undergrads had never had another college experience and would accept everything as normal. They didn't question that professors were unavailable, there was zero advising or that many classes were impossible to get into. They also didn't question things like shortages of lab supplies. I had another college experience to compare to and I was routinely astounded what UCLA students accepted as normal.

UCLA consistently rates extremely high in student satisfaction, retention, etc. compared to the kind of schools that PP seemingly believes provide more resources. And many Bruins, myself included, study abroad or were transfers and thus do have some basis for comparison. There's a large discrepancy between the online kvetching about UCLA (large classes, scheduling, etc.) and the actual student experience, which is generally very positive.

That said, the UCLA grad students in my department seemed miserable. They convinced me not to seek a career in academia. Speaking of which, in the history of DCUM, has a grad student ever given a favorable review of the undergraduate experience at their school? It doesn't seem like it.

That's some strong Kool aid. Study abroad really provides no perspective and transfers are mostly from the California CC system with its own issues. California weather and the UCLA campus are absolutely beautiful, so I'm not surprised that students are happy. They also are mostly from California and tend to be less critical than their East Coast counterparts.

I had a pretty broad group of friends at UCLA, including my now husband in a different department, and we were all pretty astounded at a lot of the stuff that seemed normal to UCLA undergrads. We were from RPI, Rice, Carnegie Melon, MIT, William and Mary, NYU, Berkeley, BYU, U of Arizona, UT Austin, Loyola Marymount , etc. A pretty broad cross section, but all really surprised with what we saw at UCLA with poor teaching and poor treatment of undergrads.

Check your own kool-aid consumption, sister. Do you really believe that your observations of the UCLA undergrad experience as a grad student are superior to that of actual UCLA undergrads? (Don't those happy, satisfied undergrads know that they should be unhappy and dissatisfied!) Why does study abroad not provide perspective? And what about transfer students? At least those students are comparing apples to apples--two sets of undergraduate experiences. And did you really poll all the grad students at the schools you mentioned about the undergrad experience? Because that doesn't sound credible. (It's not like Berkeley, Texas, or UA offer a superior undergrad experience.) At a minimum, it sounds like a bizarre use of your time.

Again, grad student observations of the undergraduate experience are pretty much never favorable on DCUM and shouldn't be given credence above that of actual undergrads.

+1. I could not tell you the first thing about the undergrad experience at the place I went to grad school.

PP sounds like the former UCLA TA troll that’s been hanging around here for awhile.

The former UCLA TA only ever commented on one pre-med thread. You are just trying to dismiss them.

[Anonymous]

You should look at real survey data. I think all the UCs participate in the SERU studies (Student Experience in the Research University). You could then also compare it to some other schools like Michigan. You'd have to find the links online.

[Anonymous]

CA parent here, if DC gets into UCLA any previous acceptances will go out the window. They will manage some large lecture halls and triple rooms for the in-state tuition at a top school.