Reality: Most UCLA students and parents are very happy with their experience and have great outcomes. They recognize the disadvantages of going to a massive public school but conclude that those disadvantages are largely overstated and certainly don't outweigh the abundant advantages. Like all schools, UCLA is not for everyone--some kids don't jive with it and transfer out. But, for such a massive school, those kids are extremely rare.

The Internet: It's overcrowded, most majors are impacted, classes are hard to get, it's 90% auditorium classes, no advising, little undergraduate focus, kids only go there for the weather.

Lot of outdated information and speculation. DC’s experience overall is they love it. Maybe it’s the food is rated #1 in the country. Just kidding, DC says intro class sizes can be 100-200 taught by a professor but with APs you can skip out on some of those. Was baffled when I asked about kids only hanging out with others of the same identity. Says has friends of all sorts of backgrounds that they have met in the dorms, class and clubs. That said he says there is a somewhat a divide between north and south campus so the school seems smaller since your classes are usually focused on one or the other. Greek life is there but not the main source of socialization. Loves going to basketball games on campus and says they are super popular and lots of school spirit. Has not had an issue getting classes but sometimes forced to take an early class when they would have preferred not to. Also says the amount of different electives offered is vast. The career center and amount of internships available are awesome (his words). He also is on track to graduate in less than 4 years mostly because of AP credits. And yes there are triples for the dorms but didn’t bother him and he has friends at places like Wisconsin also in triples.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

No, that person commented on multiple UCLA threads. They became a regular here.

But you’re right, I am dismissing the views of a former grad student (probably 20+ years ago) opining on the undergraduate experience. Absolutely.

You shouldn’t dismiss them, it’s become worse, not better.

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.

So, like every institution everywhere? I went to a tiny LAC and all the black/Asian/Hispanic students stayed in their own groups. People are attracted to those like them. It’s called human nature.

What makes UCLA different is that the typical proportions of racial/ethnic groups are quite different.

Don’t go then. It’s tiresome hearing DMV freak out about UCLA’s demographics. Guess what? White people in California are a minority in the 18-22 age bracket. We are a Hispanic state, we have a significant Asian population. We also have a pretty big middle eastern population. It’s extremely diverse state, it’s a wonderful place to be. If you want to be surrounded by all white people, stay in VA..

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.

So, like every institution everywhere? I went to a tiny LAC and all the black/Asian/Hispanic students stayed in their own groups. People are attracted to those like them. It’s called human nature.

What makes UCLA different is that the typical proportions of racial/ethnic groups are quite different.

No they are not. Demographics are available for all the UCs on the UC website along with GPA averages of incoming freshmen etc. they are not "quite different" to any college whatsoever.

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.

So, like every institution everywhere? I went to a tiny LAC and all the black/Asian/Hispanic students stayed in their own groups. People are attracted to those like them. It’s called human nature.

What makes UCLA different is that the typical proportions of racial/ethnic groups are quite different.

How so>

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.

So, like every institution everywhere? I went to a tiny LAC and all the black/Asian/Hispanic students stayed in their own groups. People are attracted to those like them. It’s called human nature.

What makes UCLA different is that the typical proportions of racial/ethnic groups are quite different.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:UCLA is one of the few places where there is a genuine black market for class spots

I’ve heard this too, but didn’t know if true. I try not to believe everything I read as so many false statements made on here on my own kids school.

I have a current student there. This is true, and I hate it, but it is not as big of a deal as portrayed. Transactions usually occur on reddit and each quarter there might be dozens of them. This is compared to over 100,000 course sign ups in general. DC has never had to do it and, while sometimes has had to wait a quarter, has never had trouble getting a needed class. Also, never even heard of a class not taught by a professor and while rooms have been triples, they have been fine. He loves it there.

Anonymous wrote:

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.

No, that person commented on multiple UCLA threads. They became a regular here.

But you’re right, I am dismissing the views of a former grad student (probably 20+ years ago) opining on the undergraduate experience. Absolutely.

Anonymous wrote:UCLA is one of the few places where there is a genuine black market for class spots

I’ve heard this too, but didn’t know if true. I try not to believe everything I read as so many false statements made on here on my own kids school.

UCLA is one of the few places where there is a genuine black market for class spots

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.

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

Uhhhh….no, just no.

Anonymous wrote:

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).

Right…because they cant differentiate between a kid whose last name is Zang and one whose last name is Rodriguez….

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.

Exactly.

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.

So, like every institution everywhere? I went to a tiny LAC and all the black/Asian/Hispanic students stayed in their own groups. People are attracted to those like them. It’s called human nature.