<p>A lot of private colleges/universities offer a much lower faculty-to-student ratio than Berkeley does, but there is no assurance that the quality of teaching that these schools offer is superior to Berkeley’s. The faculty that teach at Berkeley are world-class and leaders of their respective fields. Many top students buy the very expensive Berkeley education because of its name. Berkeley is in the list of most top employers. </p>
<p>
Really? Prove it.</p>
<p>^^^ I second that… With regards to engineering, Duke is not in the same class as Berkeley so I would be surprised if getting into Duke for engineering was more difficult.</p>
<p>BlueBayou, Cal for OOS is as selective as they come…certainly as selective as Duke.</p>
<p>For that kind of money, you could get a much better, more personal education in a place with better facilities, smaller classes, and more prestige.</p>
<p>^ Yeah, seriously.</p>
<p>“UCLA and UCSD aren’t very far from Berkeley in terms of prestige.”</p>
<p>No, just no. Maybe UCLA is close but not UCSD.</p>
<p>“All 3 UC schools appeal to international students who’d like to attend American schools that truly represent the American culture and lifestyle.”</p>
<p>Again, NO! Unless the majority of American population is Asian American and also more than 50% of the states do not experience snow. The UCs are popular because the weather there is just right, not to cold not too hot.</p>
<p>“For that kind of money”</p>
<p>What kind of money would that be Endicott? How do you know the OP won’t get a merit scholraship?</p>
<p>“you could get a much better,more personal education”</p>
<p>I doubt you can get a “much better education” anywhere. More personal perhaps, but not at any academic powerhouse. Schools like Harvard, MIT, Stanford etc… are not known for having very hands on faculties.</p>
<p>“in a place with better facilities”</p>
<p>Yeah right!!! LOL! I challenge you to find me better facilities than Cal. I have toured dozens of campuses, and Cal’s facilities are world class.</p>
<p>“smaller classes”</p>
<p>Granted, Cal classes are not the smallest. Then again, they are always appropriately and manageably sized</p>
<p>“and more prestige.”</p>
<p>Again, I doubt it. Only 5 universities are more prestigious than Cal…where it matters anyway.</p>
<p>So, if I’m planning on attending a University to major in Engineering - then despite all the issues with the UC system, I still ought to apply to Cal - if considering that I’ll be applying to privates with similar COA’s as well? The main issue is that I really need to graduate in 4 years or less. While I can afford the COA for OOS students, having to pay for a 5th year of tuition would be extremely financially straining. However, I do come from a dual credit based high school (where we actually attend a local university during our 11/12 years of high school and earn around 68-72 credit hours in mostly introductory science/math courses like Biology, Gen Chem, Cal I, II, III, etc) - so I’ve been contacting the staff at Cal to see if my credits would transfer. </p>
<p>And no some posters are right, there are tons of people from my school who get accepted to Berkeley OOS every year - but very very few that get accepted into CalTech or Stanford. Especially Stanford.</p>
<p>Alexandre:</p>
<p>while I generally agree with most of your posts, you are incorrect about Cal’s selectivity (#23). It is a much easier admit than Duke (Trinity) and easier than Cornell (CAS, dunno about Eng), even OOS; the UC’s are just begging for OOS full-payors – one born every minute! </p>
<p>OP: if you have lotsa AP/dual credit courses, graduating in 4 years from any UC won’t be an issue. UC is very transfer course friendly.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Of course. Statistically, the numbers for unhooked OOS are not much different than similar instate kids . Thus, the math (and logic) indicates that OOS admissions may in fact easier than instate for unhooked kids from suburban schools (again, it’s the full pay aspect). But yeah, my opinion.</p>
<p>bluebayou, from my experience, Cal OOS is as selective as Cornell, Duke etc…</p>
<p>This said, Cal’s admissions process is far more formulaic. An OOS applicant with a 4.0 unweighed GPA, lots of APs, a 2300 on the SAT and over 750 on the SAT IIs has a very good chance of getting in whereas a student with less than a 3.9 unweighed GPA, less than a 2200 on the SAT has virtually no chance of getting in. </p>
<p>And for the record, Cal’s selectivity ranking is #14, not #23.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Agree. But I would suggest that the same applicant would have less of a chance at Duke (if only bcos Duke has more of such apps and fewer spots). Do you disagree?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Actually, if that same applicant is hooked, ie, ELC from an inner city school, low income, first gen, or writes a wonderful essay about overcoming “adversity”, their chances are pretty good.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Not sure what that means for an OOS applicant?</p>
<p>Per your quotes, BearCub:</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>UCB, UCLA, and to a lesser degree, UCSD, being public, have a “burden” to educate those from under-performing high schools particularly in their areas. This isn’t in reponse to what you’re stating here, but what you said prior, something about Berkeley’s stats not being on par with Duke’s or wherever. This would probably be the main difference between Berkeley’s and Duke’s admission stats differences. </p>
<p>There are undoubtedly some who are able to gain admission to Duke and not Berkeley and certainly vice-versa. Now, if you said Berkeley and Harvard, then I would completely agree. Harvard and some of the others on its plane are on a completely different level wrt admissions.</p>
<p>Wrt UCLA and Berkeley, UCLA has a greater “burden” of underperforming high schools in its area from which to admit, over the Bay Area. This is the main difference between the mean/median “stats” of frosh at both schools, mainly ~ 30 SAT points. </p>
<p>There is no difference in class-standing/gpa in admits between the two, and both schools admit to the top levels of CA high schools. In this regard, both schools are more stringent than the great bulk of private universities, as the vast majority of private schools don’t have floors (quintiles, etc) from which to admit. </p>
<p>There is a huge difference in admitted-student stats of the various high schools (feeder v underperforming) in CA to both Berk and UCLA. </p>
<p>At an underperforming high school, the mean stats of a student could be a weighted 3.9 gpa and < 1800, SAT. This is because of there wouldnt be much if any A/P at an under-performing high school, nor would the students have the economic backgrounds to buy a good SAT score. </p>
<p>UCSD’s admissions off of its pror formulaic mixture of accumluated points, had (has) a free-standing admissions policy within UC that didn’t have as large a burden of admitting from many underperforming high schools in CA. This is why there’s not really a lot of difference in UCSD’s “stats” and, say, UCLA’s.</p>
<p>So all three admit at least some from underperforming high schools, and this would seem natural as all three are state schools. You can say all you want about the mean/median “stats” of incoming frosh to all schools and say, this school is “better” than another, but unless you look at the policies wrt admissions, you’d be missing a lot of info. Yeah, it’d be nice if all schools could cherry-pick like Harvard, with all students having teh same opportunities, but we know that isn’t the case. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>All three UC schools mentioned do have large Asian populations, true. But the question is: how are the students at each of the three assimilated into American culture?</p>
<p>UCSD is on bluffs of the Pacific. So that school despite its science-like culture, does have a smaller surf culture. Its too academic a school to have a large surf culture but it does have one. The problem with SD, too, unlike UCSB Isla Vista - a mile (?) square of hard partying 18-23 year-olds, which is just and expanse of apts, and for which Jim Rome calls, the ghetto by the sea is its in a tony retirement community of La Jolla, and has a lot of 60-somethings. So SD students couldn’t party in the surrounding areas if they wanted. </p>
<p>The Asians at UCSD would probably be pretty assimilated into Calfornia culture because they are CA natives, because the school doesn’t have a lot of international students. </p>
<p>UCLA is pretty close to the beach, about seven miles, and does have a surf culture, but also has many cultures. But northeast of campus, not too too far from campus, it has The Strip, which has many clubs, and there are clubbers on campus. People are drawn to UCLA because of the multi-faceted things LA has to offer, some profoundly cultural. </p>
<p>Further, the Asians at UCLA are pretty integrated into California sun (if not surf) culture, and theres not a lot of difference between a blond girl with a great tan in shorts, or an Asian girl w/in the same. Both look beautiful. </p>
<p>Theres an editorial in here somewhere in other words, dont judge someone on race. Id say, of the three, UCLAs Asians are probably the most assimilated, even if UCLA has the a lot more internationals than SD. In other words, the internationals come to UCLA to become immersed in CA culture.</p>
<p>At Cal, there isnt as much CA culture as UCSB, UCLA, or UCSD, and people there, internationals, et al, retain their culture. </p>
<p>If I were to rank the UC schools as being integrated into CA culture, I would say:</p>
<ol>
<li>UCSB - beach, surf-culture, Isla Vista, partiers </li>
<li>UCLA - Sun culture, clubs, Westside of LA</li>
<li>UCSD - beach, surf culture</li>
<li> UCSC - beach… a lot of hippie culture</li>
<li>UCB, UCR, UCM, UCD<br></li>
</ol>
<p>A point to the OP is, yes, if paying oos tuition isnt a problem, by all means come to California and experience California lifestyles at any of the UC campuses. Berkeley and UCLA in particular are admitting probably almost 2xs the number of non-CA residents, and its becoming easier for you all to gain entry. Before it was almost impossible because of impossibly tight standards, but its becoming easier every year.</p>
<p>
Berkeley engineering requires its undergrads to graduate in 4 years.
[Freshman</a> Admission FAQ — UC Berkeley College of Engineering](<a href=“Prospective freshman FAQs - Berkeley Engineering”>Prospective freshman FAQs - Berkeley Engineering)</p>
<p>The engineering department has not been affected by the budget cuts, as current engineering undergrads on this site can attest.</p>
<p>California budget proposal restores funding to UC.</p>
<p>^^^ Exactly. I mentioned this before. Also admission to the engineering school is limited. Class sizes are not especially large in the upper division courses. For engineering, Berkeley is among the best in the nation and if money is not an object, worth checking out.</p>
<p>^ Not only for engineering. Berkeley is quite strong for computer science, mathematics, economics, chemistry, and of course, business.</p>
<p>$50k+ per year is a lot of money. I even have trouble with the idea of paying that much at HYPSM or Wharton, and while UCB and UCLA are outstanding I think it’s very difficult to justify based on ROI.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Then you should be worried more if you’ll attend schools like Cornell, Brown, Emory, Vanderbilt, Rice and the like. Berkeley grads earn significantly more than grads of these private schools.</p>
<p>I’d say, if your family is rich then Berkeley would be a great deal. Rich students thrive at Berkeley. I also think the same way about attending UMich and UVa. But if you’re from a poor family, take a scholarship and go to Duke, Rice, Emory or Vanderbilt.</p>
<p>^ I agree with the first part. That doesn’t make me wrong.</p>
<p>$50k is not a great deal no matter how rich you are. It may be livable though.</p>
<p>I’m saying I’m not sure if I can agree with your statement. </p>
<p>Since Berkeley grads earn more than many grads from top private schools, I think it’s worth attending than those expensive private schools. </p>
<p>If you can’t justify attending Berkeley because you think it’s expensive and the ROI would be longer, then you should be more cautious in going to some top privates. The ROI for Brown students/grads, for example, is longer than Berkeley grads.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Some of the strong departments at Berkeley get lots of private funding and therefore not affected by the budget cut.</p>
<p>If I have $50k a year to pay for college, I would consider all options. Visit, apply and see what happens.</p>