Not because of the football teams because of educational puposes!
2007-10-09 14:09:51 · 5 answers · asked by Anonymous in Education & Reference ➔ Higher Education (University +)
Both schools are prestigious. UCLA is the higher ranked school. UCLA is a public university and USC is private. So, if you are a California resident -- UCLA also much cheaper.
There are a few programs -- like Film -- where USC is better. But on the whole -- UCLA all the way.
Plus -- don't you think you would look bette rin blue than in maroon?
2007-10-09 14:33:24 · answer #1 · answered by Ranto 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I would most likely pick UCLA, cheaper and a higher ranked school. UCLA is rated a better school (No. 25 in National Universities) according to USNews compared to USC (No. 27). (http://colleges.usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/usnews/edu/college/rankings/brief/t1natudoc_brief.php) Overall both are excellent schools. Just depends on how much you are looking to spend. UCLA is a public university whereas USC is private. If you are in state, UCLA is around $22,000-$24,000/yr. If out of state, UCLA is $41,000-$43,000/yr. (http://www.admissions.ucla.edu/prospect/budget.htm) USC is around $49,000 a yr. (http://www.usc.edu/admission/fa/costs)
2007-10-09 21:48:35 · answer #2 · answered by S281 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
UCLA, USC is for spoiled rich children who can't get into higher ranking schools.
2007-10-09 21:56:03 · answer #3 · answered by Jen 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
USC. It's more prestigious.
2007-10-09 21:59:55 · answer #4 · answered by xo379 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
USC
2007-10-09 21:23:04 · answer #5 · answered by Cami the Awesome 3 · 0⤊ 1⤋