<p>Hi, first sorry for that title.
After I got accepted into UCLA, I searched some info about the school.
Then I found that about 8000 people is whites, 9000 is Asian Americans, and 1000 is internationals. wow it means there are only about 5% of internationals...
In fact, 92% of all UCLA students are instate, Californians.</p>
<p>As an international student, it seems "wow, it's very easy to go UCLA, if I am instate."
It is very surprising that 92% is all instate...not even from states, but from California!!!</p>
<p>I also got accepted in William and Mary, and it's very tough to decide what school fits me well. UCLA is very big, compared to WM... But I can't abandon UCLA because of its name value. UCLA always ranked in higher position than WM. I know that ranking is nothing, but for most of people, it's something...</p>
<p>How do you guys think? Is UCLA worth to go as an international?</p>
<p>-oh, becuz of large student body, it's hard to have required classes and sometimes, or often, assistants-not professors-teaches the class...........I don't know it's true or not.</p>
<p>I don’t know precisely, but I know in general that it is more difficult for an international or out-of-state student to be accepted into UCLA because UCLA IS a University of California…meaning it is part of California’s public university system, and is funded by California taxpayers. However, this year more OOS students were accepted because they pay full tuition.</p>
<p>It’s easier to get into UCLA instate but OOSers also find public universities less appealing. People would rather spend $52k tuition at a place like USC or another private college of similar ranking where class sizes are smaller. In this way, there is a dual pressure on OOS students. It may not be that much more difficult for OOS students as one may think. The statistics could instead reflect on low OOS yield rates. </p>
<p>With that said, I would choose UCLA over William and Mary merely because both are public universities and there is quite a bit of rank difference between the two. Most preferably, though, I would prefer going to a place like Vanderbilt or Georgetown if I were OOS.</p>
<p>Granted, this statistic data does not factor in the quality of applicants. While, on surface, this may show that OOS may have a better chance of getting into UCLA than as instate, no one can authoritatively claim about the quality of applicants for both brackets.</p>
<p>True, you can gather some empirical observation data based on some selective group of your friends (My high school friend got in with 3.5 GPA!), but in reality, I can find as many OOS students who got into UCLA with less than 1800 SAT as many instaters who was rejected from UCLA with 2200 SAT + 4.0 GPA (yes, true, very true)</p>
<p>If you want an intellectual academic LAC experience focused on undergrad, W&M is way, way above UCLA. If you want huge school, sports, party, LA scene then UCLA is for you. Two very different schools.</p>
<p>thanx all you guys. first, no one can dislike the weather of CA. And also the popularity of UCLA. However, I prefer small schools to big ones. Both schools are good, but pretty different: the sizes, weathers, rankings, and so on. </p>
<p>Then, question. If we think of both schools w/o outer factors like weather, sizes, whatever…and just consider the quality of class, which is better?</p>
<p>They are both world-class institutions. The UCLA degree is more reputable on the West Coast, while W&M will serve you better in the South (the UCLA name is the most widely-recognized college logo in the world though, so it’s recognizable anywhere). At both schools, you will find great academics. At UCLA, I would say that ~60% of my classes have 30 students or less; the rest range between 100 and 200 (broken down into additional discussion sections of 20 students or less). Don’t know the demographics of W&M. </p>
<p>There are plenty of international students at UCLA though (we rank in the top-10 nationally in that category), so you won’t feel out-of-place. Good luck!</p>
<p>Keep in mind that the people you’re asking to compare the two likely haven’t attended both and some might not have attended either one. I don’t see how they can compare the quality of the classes at both unless they have intimate knowledge of both. Keep that in mind when considering the responses. The overall quality of the students at UCLA is very high which will raise the bar on the level of education. I haven’t checked the stats of incoming students (GPA/SAT) at W&M so I can’t compare them both for you but you can check on that aspect yourself as well as faculty/student ratio, overall campus size, research opportunities, different majors offered, etc. yourself through the websites of the colleges you’re interested in.</p>
<p>UCLA is by no means easy to get accepted to instate. There are many top students who were rejected who can attest to that including some who were admitted to Berkeley but rejected from UCLA. Keep in mind that California has a very large population and the primary purpose of the UCs is to serve them.</p>