<p>Which is harder to get into from OOS?</p>
<p>I would say UVA.</p>
<p>UVA I think. But I would love to see some stats.</p>
<p>I agree; the University of Virginia is more competitive for out-of-state applicants.</p>
<p>UVa – it’s not even close.</p>
<p>I would assume UVA-by a fair margain. I believe UVA and UNC Chapel Hill are the hardest for OOS.</p>
<p>They are harder than Berkeley and L.A.?</p>
<p>UCB and UCLA are also near-impossible OOS, though that might change with the state of the UC system right now.</p>
<p>But yeah, UVa is much more difficult OOS than Michigan. My HS in New York basically gets like 40 people into Michigan every year (it’s one of the safeties for the Ivy League-hopefuls in my school), whereas the only kid this year to get into UVa was an athletic recruit. With that said, OOS selectivity probably isn’t indicative of academic excellence; both are probably top 5 public schools.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Not even close to true.</p>
<p>Both are currently seeking more OOS students because they need the money. UCLA’s acceptance rate for OOS students is 28%, as compared to 22% for in state. And that was before they needed the money.</p>
<p>and oos students accepted to UC would shell out 50k every year? Unless there is a significant aid package for oos students, I think most would rather choose ivy league or other school.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I agree that it’s not close to impossible, but don’t you think the admittance rate is higher because the pool of applicants is much more self selective and of much higher quality? A student with the average stats of an in-state kid had no shot at Berkeley or LA before this financial crisis. Now that may change with the need for more money.</p>
<p>@ Collegebound_guy – I think before the financial crisis in California a lot of students were interested in coming to Cal or LA. Both are great schools and in great locations. But now, going to a private or your own state flagship would be much better ideas.</p>
<p>Are UCLA and UCB still tougher than UVa?</p>
<p>But UCLA and UCB won’t give you money if you are OOS. UNC and UVA will give some, I thin they meet 100% need, but I could wrong. Michigan is so-so with the aid.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>All of the UCs are considerably easier to get into than any ivy. I agree most all would choose an ivy if accepted. The exception would be some internationals as Berkeley is a big name in Asia.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>No. Over the years I’ve seen lots of kids get into the top UCs from OOS with the average stats at the schools.</p>
<p>Agree with hmom5. Even if the UC’s weren’t seeking OOS money, they’re still easier to get into OOS than either UVa or UNC.</p>
<p>I’d rank 'em thusly"</p>
<p>UNC
UVa
Cal
UCLA-William & Mary
UMich</p>
<p>In general, UMich is an easier admit OOS than Cal is instate.</p>
<p>
Then our school must be an exception because we haven’t sent one to either school in years. My guess though is that the majority of those OOS acceptances are made up from athletic admits, as both schools are pretty strong athletically. Like I said though, things probably have changed because of the UC situation.</p>
<p>
Can you wager why multiple 4.0, 2300+ applicants from my school have been rejected in years past then? And these are the same kids that have been accepted by multiple Ivies, so it’s not as if there was a serious detriment to their application.</p>
<p>Well I’m applying to UNC and UMich no matter what… but now this makes me want to choose Cal/UCLA over UVa…</p>
<p>
Odds are you’re going to have to pay a lot more for the UCs than you have to for UVa.</p>
<p>FA isnt a problem for me currently, my parents and 4 grandparents have a lot in savings that should cover most of my education.</p>
<p>So I’m more concerned with where I have a better chance to get in (although all are reaches).</p>