College Help (Los Angeles, San Francisco, Berkeley: safe neighborhood, schools, universities)

[addictedtosmallville]

Hello!

I'm a potential college student, looking into colleges for the Fall of 2010. I'm from the Upstate NY area, and recently I've given some thought into going West for college, "west" being California. I wanted to get a couple questions answered, figured this would be a pretty good place to ask them.

1) I'm thinking USF in SF Bay Area, and then either USC or UCLA in LA. What are the biggest differences between San Francisco and Los Angeles?
2) Is Los Angeles a college student friendly city?
3) The area around USC-I've heard some bad things. Is it a safe place of the city?
4) USC vs. UCLA-which one is better?
5) I know it's expensive to live in California-is SF or LA pretty much the same in cost? Is that as much of a factor while you're still in college in the area?

Thanks so much!

[Bunjee]

My opinions:
1) SF is smaller, more easy to get your head around, more pedestrian and public transit friendly. Ultimately, for the undergrad experience, I think SF is the better choice.
2) Well, LA's not hostile to students. It's big and mostly indifferent, I'd say, but I'm not certain what issue is being posed here.
3) 50/50. Not conventionally desirable, but with some savvy it can work out. I know that's not helpful to an out-of-stater, so I guess I'd say you'd probably end up commuting to USC from another neighborhood.
4) That's not something you ask a Bruin. But it does depend on the major, to be neutral. USC has some status, being expensive, though. Speaking of which:
5) This is the real matter. Granted, I was in SF in the 90s during its major housing crunch, and the fact is that's never going to improve significantly because the city cannot grow. You can find housing cheaper in LA. However, you'll probably be a car commuter (though on the Westside the Blue Bus is great for getting to UCLA and roommate situations are easy to come by). In SF it's also possible but it's a much tighter market and you will likely end up in a tiny room in a cramped Victorian. Still, for a young student that shouldn't matter too much.

This is just a broad overview. You'll really have to visit, and none of this has anything to do with specific academic programs, which is primary.

[the city]

University of San Francisco is the better choice for you. All of the colleges in LA have gang issues.
CSU Northridge, CSU LA, USC, and UCLA all have gang issues. UCLA is the safest of all them.

[Bunjee]

All of the colleges in LA have gang issues.

I think this statement needs to be clarified and substantiated if it's to be of value. "Gang issues"? At a university?

[Charles]

Originally Posted by addictedtosmallville

I'm a potential college student,

1) I'm thinking USF in SF Bay Area, and then either USC or UCLA in LA.



USC vs. UCLA-which one is better?

Are you familiar with the tuition expenses (especially for out of state students)?
What are you going to major in?
Have you researched the academic entrance standards for these universities? Do you think you meet them? (What is your GPA? SAT? ACT?)

What does "better" mean?

[cmw2133]

As someone who has been through undergraduate and graduate school, I recommend you choose on academics & career prospects. Then look at cost/financial aid package. Location is a peripheral concern, if that. That said, UCLA is the best of the three schools you're considering, but you're leaving out a lot of schools, such as Stanford, UC-Berkeley, Pepperdine, etc.

Take a look at US News, consider your GPA, SAT and ACT scores, like Charles said, start figuring out where you can get in, then figure out which schools have the programs in which you're interested, then consider the relative strengths of those programs, then think about tuition and financial aid packages, then maybe location. Coming from upstate NY, I understand the appeal of Southern Cal, but you have to think about the 50 years of your life after graduation more so than the 4 you spend in undergrad.

[addictedtosmallville]

I'm ultimately going into Architecture-and as I'm coming from out of state the cost is going to be about the same for me wherever I look. I'm also looking to be in "the city" where I go, I've already gone college visiting in NY, Boston, Philly, and around where I live. In terms of GPA/Test Scores/Transcript that's not a huge deal, I know I'm in a good place for that. My biggest criteria are: programs (architecture, and psychology), location (connection to opportunity), and challenging academics.

My initial reaction was more of just ignoring LA, I've heard so many things about it as much more "suburb-y" than anywhere else I've looked, but I realized I would be passing up big options if I didn't even bother to look in LA if I was going to look in California at schools.

I stumbled across USC/UCLA while looking for major/academics-many of the other great schools in the area don't offer programs for architecture at the level I want.

[majoun]

Originally Posted by Bunjee

I think this statement needs to be clarified and substantiated if it's to be of value. "Gang issues"? At a university?

"The city" meant that the neighborhoods where CSULA and USC are located have gang issues. CSUN's neighborhood is safe but very close to some neighborhoods that do have gang issues. UCLA's neighborhood doesn't have gang issues and isn't near any neighborhoods that do. It DOES have homeless issues but that's true of all of L.A.

USF is in a safe neighborhood, the Richmond District, but it's FAR closer to some areas (like the Fillmore and Mission, and parts of Lower Haight) which have gang issues than UCLA is.

[Bunjee]

Ah, got it. For a moment there it was either amusing to think of university-level gang wars, or depressing to imagine the phrase "college forensics" as horrifyingly ambiguous.

Darn, OP, I wish I was still in contact with an architect friend who did undergad at UCLA, grad at USC and is now working in SF! What I know is UCLA and USC are both respectable. A few years ago I remember an article in the LA Times on how UCLA was beginning to make its architecture program much far more rigorous, poaching talent from Cornell, IIRC. (USC has always been fairly strong.) However, if you're looking for a longer history of excellence in this field, Cal Poly San Luis Obispo is one school to seriously investigate. That's smack in-between LA and SF.

More personally, Los Angeles is an anomalous city. It's prototypically decentralized and sprawling as part of its very nature, much to my chagrin as someone who likes a little more containment. And yet by that nature LA's very fluid and surprising. Within the urban planning discipline of architecture you might find this of interest, even rewarding. Much as, in psychology, you might find a nut more interesting than the most upright citizen.

[Charles]

Originally Posted by Bunjee

However, if you're looking for a longer history of excellence in this field, Cal Poly San Luis Obispo is one school to seriously investigate.

SLO is an outstanding architecture school. On top of that, it is beautiful, relaxing, and close enough to LA that a weekend trip is realistic. Santa Barbara is an hour away. Endless outdoor recreation opportunities. Personally, I'd attend SLO for architecture before the other schools mentioned - just because of the "SLO life". Then again, I'm 47, the SLO life to me is more appealing (maybe a nice place to retire) than the Westwood hustle bustle life. Maybe for a younger person, the LA life would be more exciting.

Architecture Department - Cal Poly