<p>I graduated from UCLA and remember its great qualities. However, 30k sounds like a lot of money in state for a university with very large classes and crowded dorms. Westwood and West LA is very expensive for rentals if a student wants to move off campus. Since the academic track record for accepted students at UCLA and Cal Berkeley is very high, it seems reasonable that many of these outstanding students can get good merit scholarships at private universities and end up paying the same or less.
I don’t know how generous the top UCs are for merit aid given the budget crisis. I recognize that UCLA and Cal Berkeley have great reputations, but I am not sure the crowded situation is worth 30k in state approximately.</p>
<p>mdcissp:
Perhaps a trivial difference but the estimated average costs for in-state at UCLA is around $27K for living on-campus, $25K for living off-campus. The cost goes down drastically of course, if commuting. The cost is roughly half of the cost at USC as an example. Some of the UCLA students will also be offered admission to USC if they applied and some will be offered merit and financial aid so in this example the final cost could actually be less at USC but I think generally USC would still cost more for many/most. OTOH individual costs vary at the UCs as well depending on various aid they might get. </p>
<p>The prudent thing to do for the students is to apply to a variety of colleges they’d be interested in and see what the actual costs end up to be based on the offers. Your point that the expensive private might end up to be less than the in-state public is valid.</p>
<p>I wonder how many applicants USC will get given the budget impact on the UCs. USC has some superb programs and is known to give both excellent merit aid and financial aid for those who need it. I don’t know how generous the UCs will be this year for merit and financial aid given the budget crisis. Obviously with the UCs posting record high numbers of applicants, the applicant pool is generally comfortable with dealing with the sticker cost of a UC education. Also, going to community college in California for in state students is a good way to lower your bills for 1 or 2 years before transferring to a UC or other school.</p>
<p>I agree that for folks who want to maximize their good options, it makes good sense to apply to the UC/CS system as well as some good other Us known for good merit & FAid & see what the NET cost & benefits of each school the student is accepted at–you may be pleasantly surprirsed at the out-of-pocket costs of each option.</p>
<p>For many in our kids’ HS, they chose USC specifically because of its excellent merit & FAid, tho of course mileage will vary. 
Everyone in HI is OOS for CA so the tuition was much higher.</p>
<p>From the LA Times website:</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Privates have used waitlists for some time to manage the budget side of enrollment and now this is being applied to applicants to the UC. This will be something new and not invited by HS seniors this year. Since UC hasn’t done it before, I expect there’s going to be a whole round of expectations as to how this will be implemented and what the implications are.</p>
<p>Stay tuned …</p>
<p>FAP, the spouse and I had the exact same thought reading this in the paper: what a brilliant political move. Frustrated parents and students, forced to send a SIR and deposit to another campus or another university, writing letters, descending on legislators, being interviewed on the news, the whole nine yards. </p>
<p>I wonder if deposit fees will be refunded in those kinds of cases. It’s not money that all can spare.</p>
<p>It sounds like decisions about acceptances and waiting lists for the UCs will be in the same time frame as regular decision around the country. Students have to put a deposit on their first choice accepted school. If they get in later on the waiting list then they just have to make another decision, and I doubt that losing deposit money will be the biggest financial loss in most cases.</p>
<p>ST:</p>
<p>Normally, I’m one of most cynical posters on cc, but I don’t see this as too big a deal. Those put on the WL will be most likely be marginal candidates, i.e., bottom of the app pool. In the case of Cal, for example, they would’ve been a Spring admit. In any event, they’ll be offered at Irvine, or SB or perhaps Davis, and of course, Merced. UC can easily re-apply the SIR to the new campus should the student come off the WL.</p>
<p>However, on the cynical side, my guess is that UC is still hopin’ and prayin’ that thousands of kids from OOS will want to pony up full freight to attend. (IMO, it won’t happen, but the powers-that-be spent too much time watching Field of Dreams.) Thus, Cal & UCLA will offer a bunch of OOS’ers admission, but have to wait until May 1 to see if any of them will bite. If not, UC takes instaters from the WL to fill the class. At best, it will be a few hundred per campus.</p>
<p>I must have turned my cynic setting up too high this morning The LA Times article said that some schools might use winter/spring admits as Cal has done for decades, which I think makes much more sense than a wait list. But I don’t think that those put on the WL are at the bottom of the app pool–bottom of the admit list, yes, perhaps. With expected cuts in capacity, these are students who would have been admitted to their desired campus last year. That’s where the outrage will come from. </p>
<p>I wonder if or how student finances (full pay vs needing FA) will influence the WL. That would be a nasty political can of worms if it turns out that either group is overrepresented on the WL. Not to mention how instate-OOS shows up on the WL. </p>
<p>Glad to hear that the SIR could be portable without too much fuss.</p>
<p>What this problem may affect is the effort to admit more full-pay OOS students to increase tuition revenue. S2 was thinking he might like a UC, now he is pretty much convinced he will stick with the privates (some of which I cheaper because of merit awards).</p>
<p>^^sry, yes, I meant bottom of the accept pool. But I don’t see the “outrage” the same. Indeed, just the opposite. Imagine if next April 1 UC comes out and says that, ‘based on our marketing prowess, we’ve generated thousands of additional OOS apps (from rich families), and we have accepted xx more of them’…the LATimes and SFChronicle woud go ballistic and their headlines would blare ‘rich OOS’ers accepted in lieu of poor instaters’. Instead, UC will WL those instaters, some of which will get in when the OOS’ers see the lousy deal for $50k (and climbing fast), which helps to minimize the political and PR fallout.</p>
<p>My guess, and its only a guess, is that the WL will be comprised of the second decile kids from the top state high schools, such as Lowell & Troy, who have high test scores and would have been accepted during normal years.</p>
<p>^^Backfill when OOSers don’t step up, I can see that.</p>
<p>Over under colleges, in the UC general section someone was kind enough to post a link to the application statistics for the UCs for this year.</p>
<p>[Fall</a> 2010 application tables](<a href=“http://www.ucop.edu/news/factsheets/2010/10app.html]Fall”>http://www.ucop.edu/news/factsheets/2010/10app.html)</p>
<p>Interestingly enough, the UC flagship, Berkeley, has way less in state kids applying than any of the other top, or even mid-level UCs. (UCLA has around 47K instate freshman applicants. SB is next, followed closely by Irvine and SD with around 42K applicants. Then Davis with 39K, and Berkeley with 38K. After that it drops off a lot for UCSC, Riverside and Merced.)</p>
<p>Yet, in overall frosh applications Berkeley came in second to UCLA with over 50K freshman applicants. That’s 12K of OOS and International applicants. Quite an opportunity to fill up the class with higher paying students. (And UCLA has around 10K of OOS and International applicants.)</p>
<p>I am not sure if the dollar is weak or strong abroad depending upon the financial markets, but generally speaking, I understand that internationals can more easily afford the U.S. $50k tuition and they like schools with prestige and well known abroad. Therefore, it seems likely that the full paying internationals with top academic records will have an easier time of acceptance to the top UCs, more so than OOS and in state–just my guess.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Just like in real estate, college selection is location, location, location. (SoCal has xx times the population of NorCal.)</p>
<p>We are OOS, looking at UCs and Cal Poly SLO. For the first time EVER, SLO sent a rep to our college fair in October. Gee, I wonder why?? He was very up front that he has a mandate to market for OOS students. We are cautiously watching the California budget issues unfold and will wait until the last possible moment to make a decision about attending a California public school.</p>
<p>SLO is a wonderful collegiate experience, but I sure wouldn’t spend OOS money to attend. There is just no reason. (Why pay ~twice the price of your own instate public?)</p>
<p>Some kids just don’t want the in state public if there are other good options. Our in state public flagship university is very big and not in the greatest neighborhood. I think the most important thing is to find an academic and social fit. If you have great stats, might as well consider private universities and see how the financial and/or merit aid works out. As far as the comment about location being important, I agree but it is not everything. Some of the top universities in the U.S. are not in the greatest neighborhoods. UCLA is in a wonderful neighborhood if you can afford the expensive housing once you leave the dorms and don’t mind the extreme traffic going in and out of Westwood.</p>
<p>^^ bluebayou</p>
<p>Because our state publics aren’t very good. We have no medical or veterinary school. Our professional schools are fine if you plan to stay in-state to practice but have no credibility outside of home. Undergrad programs are improving slowly, but do not provide the stepping stone to grad school or jobs like Cal schools do. We chose to live in a scenic, low-population state with amazing outdoor recreation and quality of life and tremendous professional opportunities for ouselves. We did this in full knowledge that our children would probably not go to college in this state, and that we would be paying our way when the time came.</p>
<p>rr:</p>
<p>I get (some of) that. But, </p>
<p>1) Professional schools are ALL about gpa+test scores (parchment paper matters only a little);
2) a Cal State (SLO) will not have the same cred as a UC nor even your instate Uni.<br>
3) For professional schools, it’s much, much better to be a resident of somewhere other than Cal.</p>
<p>A 4.0 from say, ASU or Wyoming or Nevada, easily beats a 3.4 from UCxx.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Sure, but for that kinda OOS money, I would highly recommend privates, and not publics. (Smaller classes, better advising, better career center…)</p>