<p>I’m only giving you all one point of view here. I know lots of kids who apply to UVA, I just don’t know any who choose to attend, for whatever reason. </p>
<p>Off the top of my head, local kids (who I personally know) who applied and were accepted to UVA have attended UMd, UNC, UC-Berkeley, U-Mich, Virginia Tech, GW, Georgetown, WashU, Tufts, Davidson, Wake Forest, University of Vermont, Hopkins, UCLA, several Ivys.</p>
<p>I don’t know how to interpret this. I just know that in my tiny part of the world, UVA is attractive enough for kids to apply, just not attractive enough for them to attend. Maybe two years from now when my third kid is heading off to college there will be three or four of her classmates who choose UVA over some other schools.</p>
<h2>Many OOS students who are not eligible for much need-based aid choose to attend other colleges that offer large amts. of merit aid vs. UVa only has a few merit scholarships to offer. The Dean of Admissions said he would love to have some merit money to be more competitive, but not if it meant reducing the amount of need-based aid.</h2>
<p>If UVa students weren’t satisfied, they wouldn’t have a current 97.5% retention rate between 1st year and second year.</p>
<p>“Off the top of my head, local kids (who I personally know) who applied and were accepted to UVA have attended UMd, UNC, UC-Berkeley, U-Mich, Virginia Tech, GW, Georgetown, WashU, Tufts, Davidson, Wake Forest, University of Vermont, Hopkins, UCLA, several Ivys.”</p>
<p>East Coast – here’s some data outside of the kids that you know. UVA’s yield is higher than any other public ivy school except for UNC. Since UNC is 80% in-state vs. 67% for UVA, the math says that UVA (while being more expensive) has a higher yield than UNC for OOS students.</p>
<p>UVA’s yield/popularity for OOS students (who pay the much higher price) is probably somewhere in the 20s. Its yield is comparable (or a bit behind) some of the privates you cite. A big factor there is that UVA does not do binding early decision as almost all those private do. BED is a way to really boost your yield numbers. </p>
<p>“Michigan’s yield in 2010 (for the class of 2014) was 40.6%. UVA was 45.0%. Other top publics: UC-Berkeley 37.9%, UCLA 35.4%, UNC-Chapel Hill, 52.4%, William & Mary 35.1%, Georgia Tech 38.9%.”</p>
<p>According to this cross-admit chart, most kids choose UVA over Northwestern, Tufts, Berkeley and UCLA. And UVA holds its own against Cornell, Duke and Georgetown. Although those numbers would be heavily influenced by the in/out of state price differences. </p>
<p>Boy, barrons really can get things stirred up around here from citing a simple report. ;)</p>
<p>A couple of thoughts after reading through five pages of replies:</p>
<p>If you have affiliations with various high schools, you find that they have traditional “favorites” where their seniors apply. eastcoast’s kids’ hs sounds like a some of the ones around here that I am familiar with (and I am a Va resident). There are pro UVA schools where seniors apply by the droves and would give their eye teeth to get in, while at others, when the college talk starts, they aren’t into the University of Virginia at all for whatever reasons and choose to apply or go elsewhere. UVA alums love their school (as can be seen by those who took time to research and post all of those numbers and facts!) and shouldn’t feel “dissed” if it isn’t for everyone. Different strokes for different folks. </p>
<p>I will say I appreciated reading the report. I wonder how much money they spent on having that one done. My question, and I think barrons also questioned this, was why was it really initiated? To feed/support the Board’s beliefs that UVA was falling behind and hence to give more ammunition to put more pressure on TS? Really, I look at some of those board members as the ultimate “wannabes”. They “wannahave” UVA be who they aren’t and for that reason can’t put a positive emphasis on who they are and what they do well. There is an old saying, “Don’t outsmart your common sense”. </p>
<p>UVA is a great school. A really fine institution. It doesn’t have to be comparing itself to anyone else. It doesn’t have to be Michigan or Vandy or whoever. It is UVA and what is wrong with that? There is a lot to be said about being comfortable in one’s own skin.</p>
<p>I don’t think yield necessarily tells you all that much because so many factors go into it. The University of Nebraska-Lincoln has a yield somewhere around 80%, crushing the likes of UVA, but that doesn’t mean it’s a better or m"more popular school." But one reason UVA’s OOS yield may be higher than many publics is that it’s one of two publics that meet full need for OOS students. The other is UNC-Chapel Hill. But I’ve heard UVA may discontinue that policy because it’s proving too expensive. In fact, I’m pretty sure I read that on CC, probably from barrons, but I don’t have any independent substantiation.</p>
<p>Virginia doesn’t send that many students to OOS publics. In the fall of 2010, for example, only 27 Virginians enrolled as freshmen at Michigan, compared to 104 from Maryland, 122 from Pennsylvania, 234 from New Jersey, and 361 from New York. But that same year only 2 Michiganders enrolled as freshmen at UVA, so while the volume of trade between the two states is modest, it is mostly unidirectional.</p>
<p>Also in 2010, 55 Virginians enrolled as freshmen at UNC-Chapel Hill, while 31 North Carolinians enrolled as freshmen at UVA.</p>
<p>UVA does enjoy favorable terms of trade with Maryland: in 2010, 121 Marylanders enrolled as freshmen at UVA, while only 38 Virginians enrolled as freshmen at UMD. Another 18 members of UVA’s freshman class came from the District of Columbia–almost as many District residents as enrolled at Michigan (19).</p>
<p>On the other hand, Penn State outpulled UVA by a wide margin in the two way trade: in 2010, 137 Virginians enrolled as freshmen at Penn State, while only 61 Pennsylvanians enrolled as freshmen at UVA. (I assume some of this reflects differing admission standards; very likely some fraction of the Virginians enrolling at Penn State didn’t get into UVA, while Pennsylvanians rejected by Penn State are far less likely to be accepted at UVA).</p>
<p>Not sure what all this tells us, but I find the numbers interesting.</p>
<p>Yes. UVA is much more difficult to gain entrance into than most of the schools you’ve cited. One need only look at the acceptance rates (both IS and OOS) to see this.</p>
<p>GolfFather–We must have been on the same tour. DS even visited again once admitted and was totally underwhelmed by the event. Everyone picks a school for a variety of reasons. Everyone needs to find the right fit–it definitely wasn’t the right fit for my DS. My take-away from the admitted day was that they didn’t need to work very hard to woo you because if you get in they seem to expect you to attend.</p>
<p>All the public ivy flagship schools have two different segments with different prices and yield characteristics.</p>
<p>In UVA’s case, it has a 60+% yield for in-state admits. That’s up in the Yale neighborhood – an outstanding price/quality proposition that’s hard for anyone to pass up. Which explains why so few VA kids enroll at places like Michigan or Berkeley or UCLA.</p>
<p>For OOS, UVA has a 27% yield. That’s better than any other state flagship I can find OOS data on. And very comparable to the private schools that UVA competes with for those OOS students (and high tuition dollars). Wake, for example, has a 29% yield. BC is 25%. Hopkins 32%. Northwestern 31%. Sorry East Coast – the data is very clear on this despite your anecdotal experience to the contrary. UVA does very well competing as a state school against private schools.</p>
<p>Why the study? UVA, like all state flagships, is under serious financial stress (although UVA is better off than almost all other public ivies). That’s what was behind the whole TS debacle. Both the board and TS agree on what the challenge is; the differences are in what to do about it. The report gives the board and TS some back-up/cover for whatever their suggested solution is. </p>
<p>The obvious solution is, as it always is, give us more money – more state funding, higher in-state tuition, higher OOS tuition, more spots for OOS students, higher salaries for professors, etc. etc. etc. Since UVA is a state school, there’s politics associated with those solutions. The report is a way to address those politics.</p>
<p>It speaks to the passion of the UVA alumni on this board that so many of you took the time to post statistics to show me how very wrong I am for making the observation that nobody <em>I know personally</em> has chosen to enroll in UVA. :)</p>
<p>East Coast – usually, you hear the “meh” attitude more from the in-state UVA folks. Understandable and similar to what you here about Cal and UCLA from Californians, UM from Michiganders, etc. Often times native Virginians are surprised how fired up the OOS-ers get about their home state U.</p>
<p>In response to a comment above, UVa has committed to continue to fund 100% of need for in-state and out of state US students through the next academic year. If you ask the President and the Staff, they would like to continue that commitment indefinitely. </p>
<p>The soon-to-be demoted Rector (Board Chairwoman) and a couple of her now-resigned co-conspirators were pushing to cut aid to out of state students. They hired a consulting firm to do a study last year on financial aid. That consulting firm recommended a couple adjustments to save money, but concluded that the quality of the OOS student enrollment would drastically fall if everyone had to pay the list price of $39K to $44K a year for tuition. </p>
<p>UVa openly admits that they charge OOS students much more than it costs to educate them. Therefore, a portion of that financial aid is not actually an increased cost to the U. but instead is a reduced profit margin. Also, some people like to merge actual UVa financial aid with other financial aid sources (including state grants to students) to make it look like the U. is spending more on financial aid than it really is. </p>
<p>When they tried to fire the President (which lasted 2 weeks before a tsunami hit the board), the Rector tried to claim that the President had not completed a strategic plan. The President responded that when she was hired, she was specifically directed by the Board to not prepare a plan because so much of the staff were disappointed that they had put so much effort into the previous plan, but it was not implemented. The President had also prepared a document that read like a Strategic Plan and had given it to the Rector, but she had not let most of the Board see it.</p>
<p>Therefore, some of these consultant studies are coming out of that line of argument. </p>
<p>The financial aid study concluded (of course) that more study was needed. As a result, a set of consultants have been brought in as moderators for discussion and to conduct this latest study.</p>
<p>UVA, UNC-Chapel Hill, and Michigan are quite similar in admissions stats. I don’t put a lot of stock in admit rate per se because at some schools the applicant pool is more self-selective, but FWIW in 2011 UNC’s admit rate (31.4%) was just slightly lower than UVA’'s (33.3%), while Michigan’s was very much in the ballpark (40.6%). This year Michigan’s admit rate is down around 32 or 33%, with a record 47,000 applicants. And the three schools draw very similarly-credentialed student bodies.</p>
<p>The only significant difference is that UNC is a bit lower than the others in SAT Math. But I don’t think you can say UVA is “much more difficult to gain entrance into” than Michigan or UNC, especially for OOS students. I believe Michigan’s OOS admit rate is now somewhere below 20%, and I don’t know about UNC but I’ve always heard the OOS admit rate is very low because they have a policy of keeping OOS below 20% of the student body. UVA is much more difficult to gain admission to than Penn State and Maryland, yes, but not ‘most’ of the schools I mentioned.</p>
<p>I’ve never even heard anyone try to assert that the admits for UVA, UMich and UNC are different. They’re the same. The only difference is UNC has no regular engineering, though they do have the bioengineering.</p>
<p>For OOS, UNC might actually be the toughest to get into. UNC has the lowest OOS price (by about $10k per year) plus the smallest OOS slice (18% vs. 33% at UVA vs. 40+% at UM).</p>
<p>Although I don’t have precise data, for OOS students UM is probably slightly easier to get into than UVA.</p>
<p>The mean SAT (1600 scale) for UVA’s OOS admits was 1422. Yikes!</p>