<p>UC schools (in-state tuition) or UNC - Chapel Hill (OOS tuition) for economic or finance degree. S is now deciding. </p>
<p>As my ony child parent would love him to stay somewhere within our very large state. Plus...living away from home surrounded by all new people (and NC is diff than CA ) </p>
<p>S is excited by UNC's finance and economics dept and the talented profs. I think our CA UCs are equal. He points to the companies who hire directly from UNC and the starting salaries. I have no response... </p>
<p>I would ask what he tends to major in. If business then Haas at UCB is excellent and since UCLA has no undergrad business then I would go to UNC-CH if I didn't get into UCB. For Economics, I would choose UCLA/UCB over UNC-CH.</p>
<p>I think there's pleanty of reason to leave the state. California is unto itself and all kids should see more of the world. UCs have very few oos kids, they are limited in that way.</p>
<p>I think suze has a good point. My experience with California kids is that they have often been almost nowhere else in the US.</p>
<p>As for UNC vs. the UC system ... the main difference that I see is in atmosphere and focus on undergrads. The feedback I get from the UCs is that they are highly impersonal. UNC has a reputation for caring a great deal about undergrad education.</p>
<p>Is that worth the cost difference? It probably wouldn't be to me, but your financial situation may be very different.</p>
<p>
[quote]
My experience with California kids is that they have often been almost nowhere else in the US.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Yabbut, one out of every six people in the US live in California. Think of California as about eight different states (San Diego, the desert, Central Valley, LA, Orange County, central coast, the Bay area, the north woods). A kid from Crescent City going to school in San Diego is going to experience as much culture shock as a kid from New Jersey going to Indiana to go to school. Don't confuse states on the East coast with western states.</p>
<p>Most of the people live in either the SoCal region of SB-SD which is one big city or the NoCal area around SF/Sac/SJ. The few others are outliers and too few to worry about. Both NoCal and Socal people need to get out more.</p>
<p>What all the different parts of CA have in common is some of the worst public schools in the Country. I think UNC would have a better educated peer group.</p>
<p>my Calif sister, who raised three kids in Mecklenberg county, one of whom is a Tar Heel alum, would disagree with you on the peer group education. </p>
<p>The two UC flagships are 90% in-state kids, and, IMO, are more competitive than than any other state public Uni....those kids received an education somehow.</p>
<p>
[quote]
What all the different parts of CA have in common is some of the worst public schools in the Country. I think UNC would have a better educated peer group.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Yes, CA has some awful schools, but it also has some great schools. UCs aren't usually getting the bulk of their admits from Compton High, but instead El Camino and Granada High...</p>
<p>UC Berkeley and UCLA seem to be matched in terms of quality of student body only by Michigan and UVA and William & Mary, but I have never heard UNC in that mix. Yes, California schools are now generally really bad, but that's a global statistic and it's a huge state. There are plenty of publics that have a percentage (not just one or two) of graduates who go to Ivy Leagues, Stanford, Berkeley, CalTech, etc.</p>
<p>The funny thing about the generalization of California kids never leaving the state is the many students in Calfornia were born in different countries.</p>
<p>Having said all that, I think there is a fair amount to be said for getting out of dodge and going across country. And UNC is a great school. But don't try to build it up by putting down California, its cosmopolitanism, or quality of its pre-eminent universities. Anything said along those lines is not borne out by reality.</p>
<p>UNC-CH is, in my opinion as someone who's pretty active in academia, on the UC level for most things. Maybe not quite Berkeley's level, but certainly at UCLA's level. It's, in my opinion, vastly underrated on this board by most.</p>
<p>But I do agree with the generalizations of California's students. What's often ignored is the gap between top and bottom. The top in California is easily at the level of any other state's top students. It's the bottom that's the problem.</p>
<p>Oh, and I would not consider it a foregone conclusion that UCSD is inferior to UNC. It is a chosen alternative for a lot of people, particularly in the sciences, over more renowned schools to which they have been admitted. It's not on a par with UCSB or other UC schools.</p>
<p>Oh, I think the kids at Palo Alto High get a pretty good education. As for NC, well, do you really think the education in the tobacco belt is far superior to that in California? I doubt it.</p>
<p>UCLAri: If you are talking strictly undergrad education, then you may be closer to the truth, but if you are talking about overall academics UNC is not close to the caliber of Berkeley or UCLA. Berkeley having across the board rankings in top 3 caliber of programs from sciences to the arts, and UCLA not all that far behind. And by more than just US News.</p>