are UC colleges worth applying to if you dont live in cali??

College Search & Selection
81

<p>If you can explain your point 4, if you would?</p>

82

<p>Here is a link to an article in a large SF Bay area newspaper about the difference in advising between Cal and other top schools: [UC</a> Berkeley’s lack of services leaves many undergrads to sink or swim](<a href=“http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2001/05/06/MN176023.DTL]UC”>http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2001/05/06/MN176023.DTL) It is from 2001, but I imagine things are about the same.</p>

83

<p>Re: my comment about Pell Grant recipients.</p>

<p>It was not intended to be offensive, any more than the similar comment I frequently see that “XYZ is a school for rich kids,” is offensive. It was a statement about the potential social culture and opportunity for a wealthy OOS student to find social peers who can afford to partake in the same level of activities that they may be interested in. I assume that much of the attraction to Cal for an OOS student is the adventure of exploring the State of California itself; including dining, shopping and entertainment in the City; touristing to Monterey and Carmel, visiting Yosemite, skiing in Mammoth, trips to the beach, wine tastings in Napa Valley, Spring Break in Palm Springs, traveling to the Rosebowl for the UCLA-Cal game, etc. I assume that Pell Grant recipients do not generally have the monetary resources to partake in those types of activities, at least not on a regular basis.</p>

<p>If these types of experiences are of no interest to the wealthy OOS applicant, then of course it would be of no consequence that 1/3 of the potential friends they meet there would not be able to accompany them on those adventures. While not important to everyone, it is something I would consider if I were a wealthy applicant spending $50,000 per year to go there, especially because <em>no</em> students at Cal (other than the few OOS ones) necessarily come from backgrounds where $50K per year is affordable for their families.</p>

84

<p>^ 0.66 x 25,000 = 16,500 “wealthier potential friends”… ;)</p>

<p>Trying to bum a ride down south for an impromptu weekend from a friend with a car is part of the fun.</p>

85

<p>

</p>

<p>Nonsense. Wealthy in-state students attend Cal because they love the school. They’ve got money to spend on having fun just like wealthy students anywhere. </p>

<p>I wouldn’t worry about the social lives of wealthy OOS Cal students, who can “only” count on 2/3rds of the student body being able to accompany them to expensive restaurants and spring break jaunts. They can spend 2/3rds of the time going out to Chez Panisse or driving to Napa. The other 1/3rd of the time, they can go hiking at Tilden Park, walk the Golden Gate Bridge before going to watch the Chinese New Year’s Parade, or share a Zachary’s Pizza (actually, wealthy friends are going to do the same, as this is one of the great pizzas of the world). Wealthy friends: buy tickets to a play. Poor friends: sign up together to work an ushering shift to see the play for free. Wealthy friends: stay at the Yosemite Lodge, eat at the Ahwahnee. Poor friends: cram lots of people into a cabin, eat PB sandwiches.</p>

86

<p>

</p>

<p>While I’m sure this is true, I couldn’t find any data to back it up, other than a chart showing that the parental income for about 20% of the entire UC system exceeds $144K.</p>

<p>On the other hand, collegeboard shows that over 50% of Stanford students receive no aid on tuition exceeding $50K per year, and 56% of USC students receive no aid on tuition exceeding $53K per year. That was surprising to me, especially because those universities are known for generous aid. Of course, Cal’s student body is much larger than Stanford’s and USC’s, so it is likely that there are more than a few students from similar economic backgrounds.</p>

87

<p>^ Bay, that’s also parents money. Not a lot of kids get generous handouts from their parents to spend on frivolities… Pretty much everyone’s a starving student. :)</p>

88

<p>I don’t think those things I listed as California experiences are “frivolities,” rather, they are much of what life is about. ymmv</p>

89

<p>

</p>

<p>Actually, the fact that highly selective colleges have so many full pay students enables them to offer “generous” financial aid. Some highly selective, private colleges are 65% full pay. </p>

<p>Admissions to highly selective colleges favors the wealthy. In addition to grades & test scores, participation in ‘worthwhile’ ECs requires some $. (Not too many Intel finalists or fencers are grocery baggers helping to pay the family rent.)</p>

90

<p>

Boring? Really?</p>

<p>When you have classmates or friends from other countries, you will learn different cultures and traditions that are only distinctive to them. You might even learn a few different language words, and you will gain friends from people in almost all countries in the world. </p>

<p>Which is more diverse? Which is more boring?</p>

<p>Class Profile #1:
37.5% Asians
37.5% White
15% Hispanic/Latin/Mexican/South American
5% Blacks
4% Pacific Islander
1% American Indian/Alaskan Native</p>

<p>85% - In-State
15% - OOS/Int’l </p>

<p>Class Profile #2:
5% Asians
87% White
5% Hispanic/Latin/Mexican/South American
1% Blacks
1% Pacific Islander
1% American Indian/Alaskan Native</p>

<p>10% - In-State
90% - OOS/Int’l</p>

91

<p>Bay, </p>

<p>Not many college kids are looking at wine tasting in Napa, traveling to Carmel or Monterey for the weekend, and dining or shopping in SF…those are things that appeal to an older crowd.</p>

<p>If students are snowboarders or skiers, they probably have discounted season passes to some Lake Tahoe resort and go up for the day…(Mammoth is a Socal resort and nearly impossible to get to from Norcal in winter…cutting through Yosemite via Tioga Pass isn’t an option…it’s closed in winter). They’re probably not paying full lift ticket prices during a holiday weekend and booking a high priced condo…They’re bunking with a bunch of kids in a “friend of a friend’s” family chalet. </p>

<p>If my kid asked for money to do most of these things while I was paying for their college costs, I’d consider them frivolities. Plenty of time for “what much of life is about” after they graduate and get a job.</p>

92

<p>

</p>

<ol>
<li><p>I wouldn’t say Cal’s undergrad is much larger than USC’s.</p></li>
<li><p>Wrt income and ‘wealth’:</p></li>
</ol>

<p>There’s a lot less discretionary income of/for a California student’s parents - let me abbreviate things by referring to these as “in-state UC student’s,” and even shorter as “UC student’s” or “UC students” - than, say, for an out-of-state student’s parents. This is of course because the parents of a UC student have generally so much more income delegated towards meeting a mortgage, and people in CA generally over-extend themselves on house payments over denizens of all other states. </p>

<p>Therefore, UC student’s parents tend to be more cash-poor over other states’ parents who can probably put more into the college funds of their children.</p>

<p>But this is the gamble CA parents are willing to engage in to provide their children with not only a better neighborhood in which to be raised, but to provide them with, generally, a better public school system so their children can attend UC or other universities. One of the chief markers on how good an area’s school system is in CA besides testing is by how the area’s high schools do in sending graduates to UC.</p>

<p>A better, more costly neighborhood of course doesn’t lead to a better school system over a less costly one. Example of that would be, say, Northwood and University hss in Irvine, CA v Newport Harbor and Corona del Mar in Newport Beach - adjacent cities, though CdM is a very, very good hs. (A lot of this undoubtedly is the highly upwardly mobile, mainly Asian population of the former two.)</p>

<p>Particularly, for Cal, UCLA, and UCSB - the first two for different reasons than that latter, UCSB - this is reflected in a lot of students coming from homes that are valued at > $1M - I’ll call them “expensive.” I’d say there are as many of the students of from these three who come from households of these expensive dwellings over just about any other set of schools in the nation including a lot of the Ivies.</p>

<p>There are obviously a lot more expensive homes in CA than any other state. The median house price in LA county is > $500K, which includes a lot of poorer communities. Certainly families can buy more in Texas and Pennsylvania with $500K (a lot lot more), and the motivation to put more in a mortgage/home would be less in these other states.</p>

<p>The top feeder schools to UC include Palo Alto, Gunn, Monte Vista, Mission San Jose, Los Gatos, Saratoga, the better San Jose hss, the high schools in Danville; working south to Santa Barbara, Dos Pueblos, San Marcos; further south Calabasas, Agoura; Arcadia, San Marino; Palisades, Santa Monica, Beverly Hills; Northwood, University, Edison, CdM; south to La Jolla, Torrey Pines, La Costa Canyon…</p>

<p>All these are in areas that have median house prices of > $1M, and in some cases a great deal more. And family or per capita income is not necessarily reflective of the inhabitants’ dwellings (or vice-versa) of these cities nor in CA in general, save for cities like Beverly Hills and some others.</p>

<p>A student can live in an expensive home, but consider him or herself “middle class,” which is at least somewhat true in CA becuase the parents would tend to be cash poor. I think this could lead the student to work during the summers, say, not necessarily to help pay the tution bill, but to have cash on hand to do make road trips up north or down south, etc.</p>

<p>I think a lot of this is the mindset of CA people in general: Private higher education in CA is not nearly as valued as on the eastcoast at least for undergrad. A lot of this is economic circumstances, though a lot of these students are extremely rich compared to other areas.</p>

93

<p>

</p>

<p>I didn’t do Carmel and Monterey, but going to Napa after you turned 21 was common. There were more free tastings back then. Going into San Francisco was very, very common. I don’t see one day trip to Napa over the course of four years, or a monthly BART ride into the city, as frivolities. </p>

<p>Bay, I too would like to see a campus-by-campus breakdown of family income ranges.</p>

94

<p>^ Sure, I did the ~monthly trip into SF via BART, a road trip to Lake Tahoe for some casino gaming and snowboarding…I can see the impromptu trip to Napa… and there are ways to do these things with little money. </p>

<p>Frivolities in my opinion would be asking your parents for money to stay at a seaside bed and breakfast in Carmel for the weekend with your girlfriend…or going on a wine tasting tour train ride through Napa…or going down to Yosemite and staying at the Awahnee…Berkeley kids would probably backpack…or if they’re on the the Cal Crew Team, be ordered to run up to Half Dome from Happy Isles. However, come to think of it, I imagine the average family income for Cal Crew is pretty high…but I digress. :)</p>

95

<p>Just to place actual numbers on estimates:</p>

<p>

I will leave it to you to define for yourself “much larger,” but the relative undergraduate numbers are:</p>

<p>UC Berkeley 25,530 undergraduates [Facts</a> at a glance - UC Berkeley](<a href=“http://berkeley.edu/about/fact.shtml]Facts”>By the numbers - University of California, Berkeley)
USC 17,500 undergraduates [About</a> USC - USC at a Glance](<a href=“http://www.usc.edu/about/ataglance/]About”>http://www.usc.edu/about/ataglance/)</p>

<p>Depending on how you choose to calculate (the key to statistics is presentation),</p>

<p>Berkeley has 45.89% more undergraduates than USC: 17,500 + .4589(17,500) = 25,530</p>

<p>-or-</p>

<p>USC has 31.55% fewer undergraduates than Berkeley: 25,530 - .3145(25,530) = 17,500</p>

96

<p>

</p>

<p>Here is one way to answer that question — average Family Income of California resident freshman students who matriculated into each campus in the fall of 2009:</p>

<p>Berkeley $109,047
Davis $88,627
Irvine $94,824
L.A. $95,896
Merced $70,817
Riverside $73,658
San Diego $80,991
Santa Barbara $96,250
Santa Cruz $99,623</p>

<p>This is taken from the UC database found here: [University</a> of California: StatFinder](<a href=“http://statfinder.ucop.edu/statfinder/drawtable.aspx]University”>http://statfinder.ucop.edu/statfinder/drawtable.aspx)</p>

<p>Here is another way to view it: % of Pell Grant recipients for 2010:</p>

<p>Berkeley 34%
Davis 37%
Irvine 36%
L.A. 36%
Merced 56%
Riverside 54%
San Diego 44%
Santa Barbara 34%
Santa Cruz 35%</p>

<p>which is found on the chart here: <a href=“http://www.universityofcalifornia.edu/news/documents/uc_access_and_excellence_0928c.pdf[/url]”>http://www.universityofcalifornia.edu/news/documents/uc_access_and_excellence_0928c.pdf&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

97

<p>I would say Berkeley is far from the largest public research university and USC is far from the smallest private research university. ;)</p>

98

<p>And if you include graduate students, USC is a bit (“bit,” of course being a very precise term in College Confidential-speak, much like “much”) larger than Berkeley. (37,000 vs 35,843).</p>

<p>But I am getting off-topic. Wait… what was the topic???</p>

99

<p>

Berkeley isn’t the largest public research university??? </p>

<p>Upon further research, you’re right. UCLA was the largest public research university by research dollars spent in 2004, though, and the second largest by research dollars in 2006 behind Wisconsin. Berkeley is really held back by a lack of a med school. UC San Francisco was #4 in 2006 and has almost the same research budget as UCLA. </p>

<p>If you tacked on UCSF’s budget, however, Berkeley would definitely be first. -.-</p>

100

<p>Michigan and Wisconsin are the number one and two largest public research universities in this country by research dollars spent in 2010. In fact only JHU is ahead of Michigan in this area out of all universities.</p>