<p>i say that because california has the UC's and the UC's mainly accept in state students and also because the UCs such as UCLA and UC berkeley are famous worldwide. to get into berkeley and ucla, oos students have much harder time getting in than californian kids.</p>
<p>There's other good states in East Coast, midwest, etc etc that are just as good as the UC's (except I don't really know the names, lol). </p>
<p>UC's are quite competitive. but many out-of-state students apply to different schools that are just as good. true, though, regarding uc's it's really hard for others. With that said, I'm a californian myself. >_>.</p>
<p>Shmeh...</p>
<p>It's not so great when UCLA and Berkeley only accept one person each from my schools graduating class...</p>
<p>But CA has some of the worst K-12 schools in the Country, so it's a good thing the competition at UCs is mostly in-state kids against each other. Also, unless your parents can pay for the UC, most graduate with huge loans because they have poor aid.</p>
<p>So no, I don't see them as lucky. I love SF and would love to live there, but people keep warning me about the schools.</p>
<p>oh seriously? my high school isnt even ranked that high and like 15 kids went to berkeley, 6 to ucla and 7 to ucsd. i am californian by the way. i am happy i live in california! ucs ftw!</p>
<p>Absolutely. </p>
<p>Also, newyorka, ***? In-state tuition for UCs is like 7k. That's relatively nothing compared to private and even many public schools.</p>
<p>California is a great place to live and has amazing universities [read: no one beats our UC system. seriously. Not to mention Stanford + CIT], but also has really crappy education.
budget cuts are beyond stringent; my school isn't going to have a library next year, AP Classes are getting shut down, and top-level colleges want some diversity.
so I guess it's kind of a double-edged sword.</p>
<p>What makes me laugh about this thread was that I was just thinking, Virginia residents are so lucky to have such a huge admissions advantage at UVa!</p>
<p>Yes, as a Californian, I would consider myself lucky.
If I weren't a CA resident, I probably wouldn't stand a chance at UCB/UCLA.
TONS of kids from my school go to UCs and we're like.. top 200 (ha) in nation.. so nothing special. </p>
<p>PLUS, we have Stanford, which also gives some sort of priority to CA residents :)</p>
<p>but then again, each state has its perks! (just some more than others ;) )</p>
<p>Well, there is a sort of downside to it. All the kids in my school were born thinking they'd go to a UC (counselors, parents, etc. tell them to go to UCs), so they don't even bother looking at other schools like LACs and miss out. I never looked at schools like Middlebury (which is my dream school now) before I came on here because no one told me about them. My counselor was just like "you'll be fine with the UCs, so don't worry about other colleges." My friend goes to Cal, but she wishes people told her to look elsewhere (like at smaller unis or colleges) because she doesn't like the huge schools.</p>
<p>But yeah, I have to admit, I always thought I was really lucky in living in California.</p>
<p>uva cannot match ucs</p>
<p>Yeah.
19 kids from my school this year are enrolling in UCLA..just think of how many actually got accepted.
20+ are enrolled into USC.
A handful at UCSB.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Also, unless your parents can pay for the UC, most graduate with huge loans because they have poor aid.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Er, no, just look at the average indebtedness at graduation for all the UC schools: it's comparable to Yale's, MIT's, etc. (Though perhaps not for long, with the changing policies on loans.)</p>
<p>Either way, the average indebtedness is something like $15k, which is not huge debt at all.</p>
<p>
[quote]
PLUS, we have Stanford, which also gives some sort of priority to CA residents
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Nah, it doesn't, but CA is lucky to have Stanford (like Harvard), as well as Caltech (like MIT). Not to mention lots of top LACs (e.g. the Claremonts), religious schools (St. Mary's, USD, etc.), state schools (CSUs are pretty good in comparison other state systems), and so on. The UC system, as a whole, is probably the best in the US; while Virginia and Michigan and North Carolina and Texas claim top publics, too, they don't have multiple tippy-top publics (Berkeley and UCLA are two elite publics), nor do they have many of their state schools dominating the top public rankings (UCSD, UCI, UCSB, UCD all usually make top 10-15).</p>
<p>Then again, California is huge, so that probably contributes to its well-rounded elite status in higher education.</p>
<p>actually, i'm pretty sure Stanford does give some sort of priority.
if you just look at the stats:
44% In-state students
56% Out-of-state students
(from CB) </p>
<p>mere conincidence? i dont think so.</p>
<p>
[quote]
actually, i'm pretty sure Stanford does give some sort of priority.
if you just look at the stats:
[/quote]
</p>
<p>No, it really doesn't. This has been discussed ad nauseum on the Stanford board. Stanford has a large Californian population because it's in California; thus, the majority (or at least a very large portion) of its applicants will also be from California, and so will those admitted; in addition, the admittees in California are more likely to attend since it's closer than, say, Cornell.</p>
<p>I spoke with an admissions officer re: geography, and she too told me: no, Stanford does not give preference to Californians, nor does it discriminate against out-of-staters; Stanford wants to enroll the strongest class it can, and discriminating like that is counterproductive to its mission.</p>
<p>Search the Stanford forum for this--there's plenty of discussion on it.</p>
<p>I was just thinking about this yesterday. Californian kids at leasts for college, have it luckiest. While in NJ, for the smart students who either can't attend or don't want to attend Princeton, the next best option is Rutgers if we wish to stay instate. Ergo, NJ loses a lot of smart students to other states. But I heard your K-12 program is pretty sucky, while ours is leet. So...it sorta balances out in the long run.</p>
<p>I agree with Kyle, a Stanford adcom told me they were working to reduce the number of Californians. </p>
<p>Up until maybe 25 years ago, Stanford, unlike lost most top schools was a regional school that got few out of state applicants.</p>
<p>yeah, i have to say you guys are pretty lucky. you have some of the best state schools in the country.</p>
<p>I agree with post #8 -- Virginia has a nice situation:</p>
<ul>
<li>UVA</li>
<li>William and Mary</li>
<li>Va Tech</li>
</ul>
<p>Michigan, North Carolina, and Texas of course. Illinois for the engineering inclined.</p>
<p>But it is tough to beat the very low cost California options:</p>
<p>Berkeley #1 for Ph.D. and #21 for undergrad
UCLA #13 for Ph.D. and #25 for undergrad</p>
<p>four more Top 50 UCs - San Diego, Irvine, Davis and Santa Barbara
the other three UCs, with Santa Cruz my personal favorite</p>
<p>Then the Cal States -- Cal Poly SLO (hidden gem), Cal Poly Pomona, S.Diego St, Long Beach St, etc. </p>
<p>The options in CA for under $8,000 tuition are tremendous, and because there are so many, one can often live at home to attend, making the out of pocket expense under $50k for all four (or five :) ) years.</p>
<p>Kyle, what those loan numbers don't include is what parents are borrowing. The all is costs to attend a UC including room and board is about $24,000 and they have very little grant money to give. When you factor in many kids take more that four years to graduate, it doesn't look like such a bargain.</p>
<p>For low income family friends private colleges became much cheaper in the end.</p>
<p>For me I'd choose VA. UVA is a closer experience to a private college as is W & M. They also seem to have more grads networking in high paying fields if that's your interest.</p>
<p>After UCB and UCLA quality of UCs seems to drop steeply looking at their published stats.</p>