<p>We need more diversity from the west coast. I feel like UVA is dominated by out-of-staters from the East Coast, especially those from NJ and PA. I have also seen a lack of Californian presence in this school. So far I've only met three this year. California love demanded.</p>
<p>We accept a good bunch each year, but I imagine that if they are good enough to get into UVA, they have many attractive offers.</p>
<p>What's your definition of "a good bunch"? What other states have more students that those from California?</p>
<p>Enrolling students from around the country is a challenge for nearly every major university. Schools from the west coast struggle to get applicants and matriculants from the east coast, and vice versa. Part of this is because of pragmatic factors (schools on the west coast are better-located for residents of California, Washington, and Oregon; taking planes can be very inconvenient; and west coasters have a number of excellent options...californians in particular have the option of attending one of several top UC's for much less than UVA OOS tuition), and because UVA simply isn't as well-known to them as schools like UCB and Pomona.</p>
<p>I think UVA does admirably, given that 2/3 of the student body must be instate and that the admissions office does not given merit scholarships of any kind.</p>
<p>That is my point though. I am encouraging West coasters to apply.</p>
<p>I love UVA and all, but if I lived in CA, it would be a tough sell to get me to turn down UCLA or UCB to spend twice as much to fly 3,000 miles to Charlottesville.</p>
<p>You know that I can't define "good bunch". That's why I used it instead of a number. A good number apply each year, a fraction are qualified and accepted and a fraction of that actually chose to apply.</p>
<p>If they get into UVA, they are probably also getting into Stanford, Berkeley, USC and UCLA, all very attractive options for Californians.</p>
<p>I am from California (LA) and going to UVA next year. :)</p>
<p>I disliked the bureaucratic, red-tape feel of Berkeley, and simply couldn't picture myself living on it's large, spread-out, concrete, and generally unattractive campus. UCLA and USC were simply too close to home. I didn't want a LAC, so that ruled out the Clarement colleges. I also felt that I was overqualified for the rest of the UCs, and I actually WANTED to travel to the East Coast, particularly the South. I looked at Duke, Vanderbilt, Wake Forest, UGA, Georgetown, Brown, Dartmouth, Emory, and many others...but I simply fell in love with UVA. When I got Echols, I knew it was a done deal. No core requirements at the most beautiful school I've ever seen with serious sports teams, a great social life, a greek scene, a cute college town, and all in a place that gets snow? I'm there. And I will be, in August. :)</p>
<p>By the way, money was never an issue for me, which is why I had the luxury of choosing any private or public school as close or far as I wanted. I even briefly thought about attending school in England.</p>
<p>Semiserious: Born in a state with the second best public school (Berkeley), could attend it for cheap cost, instead to choose to pay a much high tuition price for the honor program of the best public school (UVa).........damn, she wants the best of everything! ;)</p>
<p>Well, like I said, money was never an issue. ;) I just didn't like Berkeley at all, didn't want to live there, couldn't picture myself there. It was just wasn't for me. Too urban and liberal and concrete and big and bureaucratic. :/ So UVA it is!</p>
<p>How is berkeley bureaucratic?</p>
<p>It doesn't have as much autonomy as UVA does. The academic environment isn't as free as it is at UVA. Some majors can be very difficult to get into and sometimes people get stuck in majors they don't like when their interests change. As strong as Berkeley is (really, one of the best universities in the world), I don't think the undergraduate experience it provides is as strong or well-rounded as what UVA provides.</p>
<p>Yeah I heard it's pretty difficult to get into some of the science majors, particularly Biology.</p>
<p>As a Californian, I've seen a lot of people head to Berkeley, and I rarely hear good reviews. For many people, it takes 5 years to graduate because it is too difficult to get into the classes required to graduate due to overcrowding. People often end up stuck in classes they don't like, want, or need and have to go through MILES of red tape to get out of them, if they can get out of them at all. It's like you never talk to a real person--you just get transferred from department to department, finding nobody who can or wants to help you because you are nameless and faceless and just one out of 40,000-odd students they have to deal with. Berkeley is simply too large, too ugly, and just not for me.</p>
<p>Wow, Semiserious, it's interesting to read this. So many people see Berkeley as Shangri-La. My one time at Berkeley was for a concert at The Greek and I loved it. It seemed gorgeous, but we only saw one specific part of campus.</p>
<p>I seem to be quite alone in my opinion on Berkeley's ugliness, but boy did I think it was ugly. I'm really more of a red brick person, though. :) The town was nice, though.</p>
<p>I think a really good example of Berkeley's attitude versus UVA's can be found in the applications to both schools, both of which I filled out so I'm qualified to discuss them. </p>
<p>UVA's application was very personal and hollistic. There were a lot of essays and a lot of opportunity to show my personality. When I met one of the admissions directors, Parke Muthe, his attitude alone with enough to make me fall in love with UVA's academic philosophy. He talked about how important the essays were and how we were more than just grades and SAT scores. I wanted to get down on and my hands and knees and kiss his feet for having such an amazing understanding of what's really important in a student. Hearing somebody finally and sincerely express those kinds of a views in a cut-the-**** kind of manner was a refreshing change of pace from most of the other admissions officers I'd met.</p>
<p>The UC application is the single most annoying application in the entire world. I think you can ask any Californian this and they will agree. They are all processed by computer before ever reaching a real person. First, you must select your classes from a list. Some classes are not "UC recognized," which means basically that the UCs just didn't give a crap about the effort I'd put into Investments or AP Studio Art. If you fill out this part incorrectly, or do not enter your grades correctly, not as in lie, just as in accidently fill in the wrong bubble or something (you have to self-report your transcript), you are automatically rejected. Our counselor told us this a million times. "IF YOU FILL THIS OUT INCORRECTLY YOU WILL NOT GET INTO ANY UCS." She proofread all of our applications for mistakes because the system is so impersonal there's no room for innocent error. Your regular GPA gets converted into some other f'ed up GPA based on your SAT score or something...it's quite odd. Then there is one essay, and there is some debate about whether it ever gets read. Aaaaand to top it all off, if your final GPA dips some cerain amount below your original GPA, your admission is automatically rescinded by a computer. Now if that's any indication of how the UCs treat you once you arrive in person...who wants that?</p>
<p>I would, if I was in California and it would let me attend one of the most respected universities in the world =/ It seems like those are all insubstantial problems with Berkeley (or UCLA, etc) as a university, especially due to the number of people they have to process.</p>
<p>After all this college drama I had to go through one of the things that I learned the most was that at most UC schools SAT is their #1 factor. They look at your scores first and put essays last. Their so number oriented which I don't like because there's more to a person than numbers. I feel that a person's sat score doesn't add up to the whole picture. How do I know this because I've been through this. I went to an SAT prep score and studied very HARD outside of the classroom but I didn't get a very good test score. In other words, taking a test is also a skill and talent that others don't have and I'm one of those people. I'm not making excuses. I'm just stating the facts. Just because one has a bad sat score doesn't mean they're a bad student. Pepperdine use to be the only big UC school that didn't care much for sat scores, and then they changed their policy and looked sat scores and grades. My essays were great but my scores weren't great because they rejected me :/. Me and my sister applied to UVa. My sister had better a gpa, activities,and grades than me. The reason why she was rejected from UVa was because of her essay. In her essay, she didn't show any humility she was very arrogant and cocky. In my essay, I expressed my passion but I was very humble and showed alot of humility. This is one of the reason why I was waitlisted to UVa. In other words, semiserious you're very correct they really do look at essays.</p>
<p>The UC's do take essays into account and they are very correct in using SAT's in admissions decisions, as is any other university. They also take GPA very seriously.</p>
<p>I would never attend a university I hated just because it's "respected." I was smart enough to get into Berkeley, I just had no desire to attend. I'm confident enough in my abilities to know that with hard work and determination I can succeed anywhere. I don't need some outside definition of prestige or respectability to validate my intelligence. Of course, I have the luxury of choosing any school I wish since finances were never an issue for me.</p>