<p>UC Davis with $7,500 x 4 in merit for a total cost of $34,500 over three years (did not visit).</p>
<p>George Washington with $18,000 x 4 in merit for total cost of $124,500 over four years (did visit). </p>
<p>Emeraldkitty,
About the debt. We've told S we can spend $136,000 for college (undergrad, grad, whatever). The rest we/he would have to finance. So it would be a total of about $40,000 in loans to go to Chicago, with no money set aside for grad school. We would probably split the loans with him, so that he would have $20K and be facing about $60-70K in grad school costs. Hope that is more clear.</p>
<p>Marite, I think Cal only guarantees on-campus housing for one year (we should be getting housing info in the mail in day); the rest of the years, the kids live adjacent to campus in apartments and small houses, splitting the rent with roommates. I don't think it adds a ton to the housing bill, but I will check. Great idea about the combined BA/MA. I will check into that right now.</p>
<p>My understanding is that many UC Berkeley students who ordinarily would finish their undergraduate educations in 4 years actually take 5 years to graduate because it's difficult to get into all the required courses in 4 years. This could be good, if you're worried about your son's age/maturity upon graduation, but the total cost is of course greater. The competition for courses may be more severe with lower level courses or in certain departments that might not be relevant for your son, so that would be worth investigating. </p>
<p>As a California kid, is he ready for Chicago winters?</p>
<p>They've built a lot of new undergrad housing at Cal in the last two years, with more on the way. So he might also inquire whether they expect to increase the guarantee of undergrad housing to more than one year in the future, if they haven't already.</p>
<p>(On the winters: my son's U of Chicago interviewer asked him whether or not he'd ever been so cold his teeth hurt.)</p>
<p>I'd choose Berkeley. The cost differential wouldn't be worth it to me. In addition, I agree with the poster who said that since your S aspires to be a politician, it would be wise for him to go to his state's flagship. If he doesn't want to go there, I'd suggest GWU over Chicago since GW is in DC, a great place for an aspiring politician. The price is better than what you'd pay for Chicago, too.</p>
<p>Sac,
UC abroad program: I have first-hand experience (year in France) and it's something I've mentioned to him. He's interested. Thanks for reminding me about it. As to whether he would take advantage of office hours, I'm doubtful about that. He's not a schmoozer, and well, he rarely has questions for teachers and won't play the game of thinking up compelling questions just to get to know them. The only way he would stand out with them would be through his class participation (he's not shy about that) and his product (excellent writer). This would be easier in smaller classes. As for activities, he's extremely involved with activities now (debate, political internships and campaigns, music) and I would see him wanting to continue that. Making friends would not be a problem, although it used to be. He is a very easy-going intellectual kid, not concerned about social status -- or hardly aware of it-- in the least. </p>
<p>Sandiegomom -- Yes, if he goes to Chicago, he will owe min. $20K in loans and be looking at financing $50,000 x 3 years of law school or $50,000 x 2 years of public policy grad school. So, it's significant. </p>
<p>Sybbie -- if he goes to Cal, he will live on campus freshman year and directly off campus, walking distance, the rest of the years. No car for him.</p>
<p>Trisk -- one more vote for Berkeley (2 to 2 now)</p>
<p>SV2- I also have heard about Cal kids not finishing in 4 years. But he has 17 transferable courses between community college and APs, so I think that most of his lower division, non-major classes would be done, which would open up a lot of room in his schedule for the major-specific coursework. Credit-wise, he is practically a junior without stepping foot on the Berkeley campus. The other possibility is to double major over four years.
As for the cold, when he applied to Chicago, Boston, New Haven and D.C., he said cold wouldn't bother him. But how does a Southern California kid really know until they get there. He's definitely an indoor guy, though, so weather is not a factor in our decision.</p>
<p>Sac, oh I didn't realize they'd built more housing. I'll check into that. I would REALLY prefer he live on campus. He's still got a bit of the absent-minded professor personality, though it's much improved from 9th and 10th grade, and I would feel better if he were on campus. </p>
<p>NSM -- Votes for Berkeley, thanks. (Berkeley 3, Chicago 2)</p>
<p>I vote for UCB, without question. If he wants to go on to Law School, his undergrad institution won't be terribly important. And in terms of getting into a good law school, his faculty recs won't be as important -- bottom line, it's GPA and LSAT score at most law schools.</p>
<p>"cangel, thanks. See these are the kinds of things I just have no clue about (that politicians should go to in-state schools due to mistrust of out of state schools, etc...). I never thought about it that way. And yes, I need Mini's practicality right now, big time. I've worried so much about finding the right fit for this kid that I'm having a hard time letting it go, even if he's fine with it."</p>
<p>Mini, practicality is my middle name, and yes, I vote Berkeley, though not for all the same, "practical" reasons. One is flexibility - with his cc credits, he can choose to be done in 3, 4, or 5 years, as interests require. And that flexibility can be converted into community service opportunities, even a term off if he finds the right one. This is home state, and if he sees that as his future home, what a great opportunity to learn about it, without the need of additional funds to do so. Work with migrant laborers. Volunteer at a neighborhood legal clinic. Do AIDS advocacy work. (or, if of the other ilk, work to abolish all taxes!) Get a one-term internship with the legislature. Work for the local Nature Conservancy. The possibilities are endless when you don't have to worry (much) about money. Yes, you'll have to back him in these adventures, but that's what the money is for, right? Allow him to get a REAL education. It will also give him a huge leg-up for law school.</p>
<p>It is not clear to me that, even straight up, UChicago is the better option when you combine Berkeley in 2-3 years and internship opportunities. (and you know I like smaller schools.)</p>
<p>(I think GW is way overrated, but that's just me.)</p>
<p>Berkeley is still one the premier universities in the world--you are not debating between Chicago and Chico State here. Chicago would give your son more personal attention, to be sure, but it's hard to imagine it would be worth the $100,000+ difference you're talking about. </p>
<p>Your son says he would be OK with either. But what if he's unhappy where he ends up? What if the short days and cold and wind of a Chicago January finally get to him--would he maybe feel guilty about being unhappy when his parents are stretching themselves financially for him to be there? On the other hand, if he ends up with a few miserable days in Berkeley, at least he could console himself that he's saved the family a very nice chunk of money (which can be used for law school, as many have suggested). </p>
<p>My H went to Cal undergrad and it was not an ideal experience--couldn't get housing even as a freshman, introductory courses were large, he sometimes had to break through rows of riot police to get to class, etc. But he remains dazzled by the quality of his professors there, had a life- (and major-) changing junior year abroad experience, and was accepted into an Ivy League law school. </p>
<p>On the other hand, if your son is sure that politics is his future then GWU is worth careful consideration too. The internship opportunities might be just what he's looking for. Academically, GW is still below Berkeley and Chicago, but moving up.</p>
<p>I'm definitely with Berkeley (and mini) on this one. Chicago is fantastic, but not $100k 'better' than Berkeley. Save the money for grad school.</p>
<p>1) If politics does turn out to be his career, take a softer schedule by using transferable credits, and volunteer with the extra time. It will "look" fabulous on a resume for contemplating public service. 2) If you track most of our legislators and governors (Arnie excepted), most have gone to a state public school (or Stanford). 3) Plenty of rigor -- just ask all the pre-law and pre-med wash outs....that first C in a kid's life really hurts. 4) Coming from the SoCal burbs, even NorCal will be an enriching experience. 5) if he likes sports...... 6) upper division classes can be quite small (10-15 kids with a prof). 7) nearly every kid I know who whines about not getting classes and therefore needs to take 5-6 years to graduate from a public state school refuses to take classes at 8:00 am and/or on Fridays.... or is conning his parents for another year on the gravy train; 6) new chancellor seems terrific.</p>
<p>Berkeley housing is EXPENSIVE, however, even for dorms, which are only guaranteed first year.</p>
<p>$187,500 would be the cost of U of C - with 5% inflation per year. I am facing similar issues and have posted numerous times about the wrenching feeling that for non-trust fund babies, it usually comes down to this question for the parents: How much are willing to sacrifice? The shirt off your back? How about the blood from your veins or your left arm?</p>
<p>This question reminds me of an ethics class when my professor said that philosophers will argue forever about the proper basis for approaching a rational answer to difficult emotionally charged issues, for instance for/against the proposition that "abortion is murder." He said that, as with the death penalty, eventually practical decisions have to be made, and are made, on various non-philosophical grounds, by nations and individuals.</p>
<p>It might help you to justify Berkeley if you made a detailed spreadsheet with every aspect of a college that is important to him, and answered a simple yes or no to "can he do/achieve that here?" for both schools. Then factor in your economic situation and your best guesses/beliefs about where the overall economy, and your family's finances, are likely to be headed in the next few years. If you have appreciating assets, such as a Malibu beach house, might make the effect of the difference negligible, if mostly stocks, anybody's guess.</p>
We had this concern about the UCs (specifically Berkeley) but after talking with several professors there, were reassured that it is as bluebayou says: most students who take longer than 4 years at Berkeley are being highly "selective" about when they'll take classes. The profs pooh-pooh'ed our wrinkled-brow concerns about 4 year graduation rates and assured us there was no reason to worry about it. And with cc credits to start out with, well... this just won't be a problem for your son.</p>
<p>As wonderful as UChicago is, I think I vote with the Bears on this one. Put me down for Berkeley.</p>
<p>I agree with SBmom. Let your son know that you'll be happy with either school and then let him decide. If he picks UCB, then go with it.</p>
<p>I too have had some reverse bias against the UC's in the past, but I now think that UCB is a terrific school. And, certainly to many people, especially in California, more prestigious than the University of Chicago (Not badmouthing Chicago - I think it's a fantastic school but really more people seem to go "wow" when you mention Berkeley than they do when you mention Chicago) Getting out a year early is a great option for someone looking at law school.</p>
<p>Unless you think he'd like to frequently take the minority position with high-level faculty. Someone does have to check me though, Chicago may have softened its conservatism in the last 20 years:)</p>
<p>Okay: 7 Berkeley, 2 Chicago (if I've counted correctly).</p>
<p>mini- okay, thanks. The flexibility factor is something I had not considered. And this is a kid who will probably need it. He is interested in so many different areas (which is why politics appeals to him, I guess), and I could see him wanting to take non-major classes or do internships, etc... and no he's not of the other ilk; campaigned for Dennis Kucinich during sophomore year, and marched against the war in Iraq while stopping in Rome during a school 2003 spring break trip, for gosh sakes. Wouldn't apply to Stanford because "it's too conservative." Sigh.</p>
<p>janesmith, thanks for adding that story about your husband. Funny, I could see S loving the idea of breaking through riot police to get to class. This must have been in the late 60s?</p>
<p>Wow, Blue... eight excellent points. Thanks! I particularly like #1 (volunteer opps adding to the public service resume... he's already got a decent size one for a 17-year-old), #2 (politicians coming from in-state schools), #4 (the diff. between So and No Cal being like an out of state experience -- so true!) and #7 (the reality of why kids really take longer to graduate... I found that to certainly be the case at my UC in the 1980s.). </p>
<p>Cal's website actually says offcampus living is cheaper by $2,000 a year than oncampus for housing, food and utilities. I wonder if any Cal parents here can confirm that?</p>
<p>Yulsie, great idea about the spreadsheet. We sort of did that with all six of S's schools to make sure he was applying to the right ones. But now that it's narrowed down, time to break out Excel again and do the checklist. As far as appreciating assets, alas, no such luck. Oh wait, we DO have a rescued St. Bernard with a recently repaired ACL injury... I'm assuming he appreciated in value by the cost of his $3,500 emergency operation... right? Could we cash him in for books and personal expenses for S? ;)</p>
<p>mootmom, that's reassuring about what the profs said. Do you have a kid at Cal or just know about it from living in the Bay Area?</p>
<p>carolyn, I was wondering what you would say. So you know what I mean about reverse-bias. I just find out-of-state schools so much more interesting and exotic, I guess. Cal is just Cal to me. </p>
<p>alumother, he's a progressive Dem., but we've heard that Chicago is only really conservative in the Econ. Dept (and that most Econ departments are conservative, while poly sci depts. are more liberal.) Anyone know if that's true?</p>
<p>Vote tally so far: 10 Berkeley, 2 Chicago... (and a lot of don't knows).</p>
<p>even chicago teaches Keynesian (sp?) economic theory, as does Berkeley. H (home of Samuelson) is probably the only place that doesn't recognize Milton Friedman or Arthur Laffer. :rolleyes:</p>
<p>momof2inca--If I were you I would check on how many non-major courses Berkeley will allow your S to take. One of my concerns about Berkeley (and all of the UC's) is that it's very bureaucratic and not that flexible about some things . . . 'course if it will save the family $100k, you can probably live with a few imperfections.</p>
<p>A question--most seem to agree that $100k is too much of a differential for what Chicago offers vs. Berkeley. At what point would any of you, if you are a little tipped in the Chicago direction, would it be worth it to choose Chicago? 5k, 25k, 50k, 100k? I guess we're expecting to shell out $80k to $100k more for a Chicago education than for a UC one (first choice UC would have been UCSD). But son was adamant he didn't want to go to a UC, so his situation was different. Momof2incas son appears to be much more flexible! S could have gone to Grinnell for substantially less (though still more $$ than a UC). Believe me, we tried mighty hard to talk him into going to Grinnell!</p>
<p>You see, I don't think of it that way. I'd focus on the student first - his or her needs and aspirations and what I know of him or her - and on the school only secondarily. And then there is the question of the value of money: 100k to some is like 10k to me (except that I'm very free about spending it on my kids when I have it.) To attend ANY of these places, my kid needed about $30k to start, give or take. We just didn't have it to spend - even if we mortgaged the house! And we are not poor, or least don't feel poor. It's just different for different folks.</p>
<p>In this particular case, given the career aspirations, transferable cc credits, and flexibility options, I'm not sure Chicago is worth an extra dime over Berkeley. But I can easily imagine a situation where, for a family that had the $100k, it would be worth every penny of it. (I doubt, though, that I can think of any scenario that Chicago is worth $100k more than Grinnell.)</p>
<p>Whoops! Got one. Kid wanted to be an Egyptologist since she was 2, or is infatuated with ancient Assyria.</p>
<p>When you are talking about national universities a person will have no trouble finding academic rigor. I would save the big bucks for grad school and go to U C B.</p>