<p>I was awarded a full ride to UCLA through the Regents Scholars program, which is an incredible deal, with really awesome perks. However, I was also accepted to Claremont McKenna, which is incredibly strong in the areas I want to study (social sciences), has paid internships and the Semester in Washington program. </p>
<p>Any advice? I'm planning on attending law school, and studying government/politics related majors.</p>
<p>I don't plan on drinking in college, and I am looking for a school that is very politically active :)</p>
<p>I’m not sure of FA from CMC yet --they haven’t sent it to me yet, but as i have a very low efc, and CMC’s FA program is very generous, right now I’m assuming that they’re on equal footing in terms of FA.</p>
<p>All of the UC’s have access to the UCDC program where you can spend a semester at a UC affiliated program in Washington DC. It’s supposed to be a great program so you’re not giving that up to go to UCLA.</p>
<p>Two COMPLETELY different environments. My criteria would be to go to UCLA unless CMC matches with a full ride. If so, you NEED to visit both because they are so different you will likely feel one or the other.</p>
<p>I’m not sure. I don’t want a humongeous school, but I’m not sure if such a tiny school is right for me either. Sadly I only have polar opposites to choose from… </p>
<p>One concern about UCLA are large classes, bad TAs etc. But then again, it’s such a large student body that it’s very active, lots of school spirit, name recognition, etc. </p>
<p>Also, I’m not sure how I feel about the drinking culture at CMC…</p>
<p>rsx… this is clearly not a joke. Claremont McKenna is a great school, within walking distance of two other schools in the consortium that are in the top 10-15 of those in the know… Pomona and Mudd.</p>
<p>I like UCLA very much, and voted as much with my feet However, my decision was strongly influenced by finances. </p>
<p>If money is approximately equivalent, then it really boils down to preference for the type of college one wants to attend… very large, Ph.D. focused, sports crazy UCLA, or very small, lots of small classes, and more 1-1 feedback Claremont McKenna. The average testing intelligence of the students at the Claremont schools is significantly, considerably higher than the middle 50% at UCLA. Top 25% will be equivalent.</p>
<p>The thing about your particular situation that would tip it for me in UCLA’s favor, even if finances were equivalent, is your status as a Regents Scholar. This will open opportunties to take very small seminar classes, and enroll in your classes ahead of almost all other students… effectively allowing you the freedom to cherry pick and custom tailor your course selection without worrying about taking 2nd or 3rd choice classes because of scheduling issues.</p>
<p>As a college counselor whose students have been accepted to both UCLA and CMC, I must say that there is a love-hate relationship for those who go to UCLA and a satisfied feeling from those who have attended CMC. If money is equal, I suggest you choose CMC. They will take care of you.</p>
<p>if you can afford claremont, I would go there (they do give good finaid).
depends if you want a small LAC that will focus on you (resources only for you, not grad students), or a huge public (and free ride!) school.
also, a thing to keep in mind is that claremont mckenna is part of a consurtium with 4 other colleges (where you can cross-register and take classes in) so really its almost like going to a mid-sized univeristy in some aspects.
I also heard that claremont mckenna has one of the best almunae networks and that it is very good for people interested in politics, govt, and law.
my sister goes to one of the 5 C’s and is extremely happy there. The administration really cares about you, and they have lots of cool events.</p>
<p>i believe that you, darling, can make it work at either school. </p>
<p>pro-con list? maybe?
the people on here can give you advice and opinions but in the end you have to go there and you have to create a future afterwards. sooo pick the one that suits you better.</p>
<p>If money is not an issue go to CMC. The UCs are in financial crisis. Classes keep getting bigger. Resources are taxed. 4 year graduation rates are low. You’ll have a higher quality college experience at CMC.</p>
<p>Is a 3.8 (GPA) from UCLA the same value as a 3.8 from CMC in the sight of law adcom at most top law schools? If so, go for fit. </p>
<p>Personally, I’m leaning towards UCLA because of the prestige thing and the enormous amount of opportunities one can tap and utilize… (if you know how to) + I thought CMC, the location and as a school, is a bit of a bubble and boring.</p>
<p>I don’t think one can assume the relative ease of getting a 3.8 at either school is about the same. I could bet it would be harder to achieve a 3.8 at UCLA. Choose Claremont if and only if your parent’s total out of pocket/loans cost ends up being less than 20k for all four years included. I’m aware Claremont has the no student loan policy which works for you. Claremont also has excellent placement into top law schools.</p>
However, my decision was strongly influenced by finances. </p>