<p>Its so cool for people that live in California have the UCs. You get a bunch of high raked colleges and tuition is only about $8,000. If your from California UCs are the best value by far.</p>
<p>While the UC's are certainly terrific schools, they are not right for everyone. They're only a "best value" if they are a fit with the individual student. Some students, for example, might find a better value attending one of the Cal States (which tend to have more career-focused majors and are significantly cheaper than the UC's), or by attending a private college or university. Ironically, some students find that it can actually cost less to attend a private institution that a UC school when the financial aid packages are laid side by side for comparison and the amount of loans/work study are compared. And, of course, one has to be in the top 12% or so of your high school graduating class to realistically have a shot at the UCs, especially the most competitive ones.</p>
<p>By the way, I don't think California is the only state with a wonderful public university value. I can think of many states which have excellent public systems, and some cost far less to attend as an instate resident than the UC's.</p>
<p>So, yes, it's wonderful that our state has the flagship UC system. But no one should march lock step towards without looking at the full range of options and deciding which option is best for them personally.</p>
<p>UCs are really great if you like crowded classes, unmaintained buildings and don't need to graduate in 4 years. </p>
<p>Actually the top ones have some outstanding grad programs, but most CA kids who can afford it avoid UCs for undergrad.</p>
<p>from the Contra Costa Times, a local Bay Area paper:</p>
<p>"Students surged into a large auditorium on the UC BERKELEY campus this week, filling all seats and sitting in aisles for a chance to hear the speaker.</p>
<p>This was no celebrity-studded special event, just the second day of class for Introduction to Economics, one of many overcrowded classes at UC this year. The lecture is officially closed, limited to 720 students. But an additional 150 came anyway, hopeful that their names might be plucked off the waiting list and added to the roster.</p>
<p>Discovering that the waiting list was full, many asked to be placed on the waiting list for the waiting list..."</p>
<p>cry, cry, personalized attention is so overated.</p>
<p>When you add in the cost of board at the UCs it isn't that cheap...many are at about $25,000 per year...and that 12% is not really holding true anymore..my son was in the top 8% and was denied admission at UCLA... By the way, he ended up in the honors program at a private school with a merit scholarship and where his Intro Soc. class has 12 students so for us, no the UCs are not the best value.</p>
<p>Well, I agree with the poster in general. You guys have some GREAT public universities. I live in NY and our SUNY system is shameful. I'm looking at state schools nearby like Penn, MD, and Connecticut, when I really shouldn't! I wish I had any of these in my own state. It's not even the education, because binghamton is alright in some fields, it's just so dreary. Not saying that state school campuses are beautiful, but you know what, Binghamton has got the damn ugliest campus EVER. It's like - you're going to live there for 4 years, you need a nice environment. Penn State and Connecticut U are actually NICE looking campuses. Besides the whole price factor, it's soooo much harder trying to get in out of state!!! BLAH /end rant.</p>
<p>cal states are your friend</p>
<p>The only downside is the size, if you even consider it a down side, some people like large schools.</p>
<p>If you want small classes go to a community college.</p>
<p>
[quote]
...and that 12% is not really holding true anymore..my son was in the top 8% and was denied admission at UCLA.
[/quote]
The top 12% essentially gets a student into the UC system, NOT necessarily their campus of choice. The only "rank" that really counts in any case is the top 4% (ELC) group, and those have 98% chance or better at the less popular campuses, 65% chance at Berkeley. Beyond that admission is based on GPA+test scores; the bar is fairly low (minimum GPA=3.0) -- and there is a spot for every eligible Californian at some campus.... but not necessarily Berkeley or UCLA.</p>
<p>Which is harder to enter between UC Berkeley and UCLA? know both are well-known schools though.</p>
<p>I would say Berkeley 4 sure</p>
<p>
[quote]
UCs are really great if you like crowded classes, unmaintained buildings and don't need to graduate in 4 years
[/quote]
</p>
<p>That's why there is construction going on at nearly all the UCs (UC Irvine is constructing some new buildings, UCSD is doing some expansion, UC Berkeley recently extended its guaranteed housing to two years after much dorm renovating), UCs (at least the top ones) boast a 4-year graduation rate of around 60% and many people CHOOSE to stay longer, and class sizes between a UC and top private universities are more similar than you'd think?</p>
<p>Berkeley: </p>
<p>Classes under 30: 74%
Classes over 100: 7%</p>
<p>Stanford:</p>
<p>Classes under 30: 79%
Classes over 100: 5%</p>
<p>
[quote]
This was no celebrity-studded special event, just the second day of class for Introduction to Economics, one of many overcrowded classes at UC this year. The lecture is officially closed, limited to 720 students. But an additional 150 came anyway, hopeful that their names might be plucked off the waiting list and added to the roster.</p>
<p>Discovering that the waiting list was full, many asked to be placed on the waiting list for the waiting list..."
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Did you forget to mention that most people who are placed on the waitlist later get into the class? Why do you think there is a waitlist for a waitlist? Maybe because sometimes EVERYONE on the waitlist gets into the class?</p>
<p>Do you even attend a UC?</p>
<p>Again, it's a matter of personal choice and fit. Some people really thrive at the UC's, and, for them, they can be excellent choices indeed. But, others find they are better served elsewhere. What bugs me is the lock step march to the UC's -- or ANY school - -without really considering all options, your personal goals and educational needs. </p>
<p>By the way, I wouldn't underrate the SUNY system. While the SUNY system may not have the "cachet" of the UC system, as with the UC's, the SUNY schools are not all cut from the same cloth and some are quite excellent. I would not automatically discount them just because you think a particular campus is ugly --- compare academics in detail and I think most people would be hard pressed to say UConn or even Penn are better than SUNY Binghamton. Again, it goes back to figuring out what you need/want, and considering a wide variety of options, not just automatically discounting or adding schools to your list. Most important, don't make the beauty of a campus your only criteria for picking a college -- what goes on in the classroom is a bit more important than the attractiveness of the campus, in my humble opinion.</p>
<p>class size to a college is like profits to an accountant; they can make it be almost anything they want it to be.</p>
<p>Another thing to keep in mind is that any single number masks the impact of larger classes. If you have a class with 300 students in it that will be the experience of ALL 300 students. If you now have 15 classes of 20 kids the average class size is about 29, but 1/2 the kids are sitting in a giant class with 300.</p>
<p>To imply by posting pairs of stats from Cal and Stanford that the experience of the typical student as far as class sizes is about the same at the 2 schools is not just misleading, it's intentionally wrong. To try to imply the undergrad experience is about the same at a school with less than 7,000 undergrads and a school with over 23,000 undergrads is folly. And anybody who goes to Cal knows kids that go to Stanford, and knows from talking to them the classes are much larger at Cal.</p>
<p>SUNY schools are also really good, but they're still second to UCs</p>
<p>
[quote]
To imply by posting pairs of stats from Cal and Stanford that the experience of the typical student as far as class sizes is about the same at the 2 schools is not just misleading, it's intentionally wrong. To try to imply the undergrad experience is about the same at a school with less than 7,000 undergrads and a school with over 23,000 undergrads is folly. And anybody who goes to Cal knows kids that go to Stanford, and knows from talking to them the classes are much larger at Cal.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Did I say that the undergrad experience is about the same at Berkeley and Stanford? I think everyone here can see that they are different. I said that the class sizes between a large public university and a smaller private university is often more similar than you would think. So explain to me again why it's intentionally wrong to post stats that the colleges themselves published on the common data sets? Is there something inherently wrong with posting statistics on CC that came from published data by the universities themselves?</p>
<p>And yes I attend Berkeley, and I do know friends who attend Stanford. I also know friends who attend Harvard and Cornell. One friend from Harvard was talking to me the other day about her 800 people class. Another friend from Cornell was telling me about studying for a psych class with 1400 students. So explain to me again how I can "just know" that classes sizes are much bigger at Berkeley, when the data published by the universities themselves show that class sizes are very similar? Unless you care to explain how 7% is a much larger percentage than 5%? Even if the 2% more holds more students, it's still only 2% of the classes. It still affects very small part of the student population.</p>
<p>Put it another way: the number of classes over 100 at Yale is 3%. So now are you going to say that Stanford's class sizes are much larger than Yale's? Even though the different is only 2%? I mean, I'm sure anyone who attends Stanford knows people who attend Yale, and knows from talking to them that classes at Stanford are much larger right? Maybe you should go onto the Stanford forums and ask how many Stanford students, after talking to Yale students, realize that class sizes are Stanford are much larger.</p>
<p>Its not like all the classes are big, the GE's are big but most of the upper division (the stuff you really care about) is relatively small.</p>
<p>vicissitudes, dont listen to mikemac, the guys ignorance towards college rankings and admittance is truely stunning.</p>
<p>Oh please, is there anyone who will defend UCs who isn't pregnant with one? Yes, the top have a 60% grda rate in 4 years, the bottom 30%. Who can defend that with a straight face? Top schools? All you have to be is top at a CA public high school, they rank in the bottom 5% of US schools. SAT score averages are nothing near close to top privates.</p>
<p>They are what they are, better than most state schools which is not saying a lot. If you are a top Cal engineer or top Haas grad, you may get an ivy like job. The top UC students will get into decent med schools. But when you look at MBA and law programs, you will see that truly top schools a fraction of the size of any UC get many more into top programs.</p>