<p>Yes, a small liberal arts college creates an entirely different (and, IMO, preferable) experience, but is that reason enough to choose Pomona or McKenna over a top-knotch UC?</p>
<p>For California residents, UCs save a LOT of money. There is also much greater name recognition for a good UC than for the Claremont colleges.</p>
<p>What do you think? Why did you choose Pomona/McKenna/Mudd over a UC, or vice versa?</p>
<p>Berkeley and UCLA have Football teams</p>
<p>I don't care who you are
A football game on a saturday is one of the most fun things you can do.</p>
<p>I've only been to about 8 games, but... I'm only a high school junior.
Ranging From Oklahoma State, Texas a m, OkU, UCLA, and most recently, the Rose Bowl
I may be rambling... but to me, I think a good football program is one of those "tip factors"
lol</p>
<p>
[quote]
Berkeley and UCLA have Football teams
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Yep, and after September 2nd, they will both be, officially, the Utes' *****es</p>
<p>The only big reason I see is fit. If you like the environment better and you prefer the smaller classes and the more attention you receive. Possibly better advising but I'm probably not qualified enough to justify that conjecture. I have trouble recommending anything except HYPSMC and a few other top schools over Berkeley and UCLA though, as they are very good schools and a good deal for most Californians.</p>
<p>This will be lengthy as I've spent the past 3.5 years answering the question and defending my choice...my apologies in advance.</p>
<p>I chose Scripps over Berkeley. I do feel a little twang every time I have to refer to my school as "Scripps...it's a Claremont College. Near Los Angeles. Harvey Mudd? Pomona? Pitzer? Claremont McKenna? We're small," but I spent this summer living in Berkeley and it made me pretty confident that I did the right thing for myself.</p>
<p><strong>Little disclaimer to avoid stepping on toes: I think Berkeley is AMAZING. Any contrast I'm about to draw between Scripps and Cal is only because the OP specifically asks about UCs and Cal was the only one I seriously considered in my final selection. Bear in mind that I'm not even necessarily endorsing what I say as TRUE...I only claim that it seemed true enough to me as a prospective student to make me choose the way I did.</strong></p>
<p>When I visited Berkeley and my dad was (understandably) smitten, I told him that I LOVED the school, but that it didn't hold a lot of interest for me as an undergrad and I'd come back to look for grad school (which I am). One of the things that struck me most strongly was the contrast in my tour experiences:</p>
<ul>
<li><p>At Scripps, I took very small tours. At one point, current students who had seen us passing through came up and brought us roses from the cutting rose garden and told us all how much they loved the school. Afterwards, the [un-paid volunteer] tourguide stayed for 45 minutes answering my mom's questions and talking about how great everything was. Even as just a prospective student, I received a sense of why a small school can be so beneficial...the tour was small enough that it could truly cater to all of its attendees.</p></li>
<li><p>On my Berkeley tour, we did the requisite sit around for a long time, get divided up into huge groups, and head off in different directions. My tour guide spent about 90% of the tour quoting AMAZING statistics that were, unfortunately, of absolute minimal relevance to undergrads. She painted a very convincing picture of why we should all plan to come back in 4 years, made it clear why the Berkeley name holds such prestige, etc., but didn't do a lot to sell me on attending the school as an undergrad. Also, she and other guides were unable to answer extremely basic questions about the school and various programs, not because of their own ignorance, but because of the VASTNESS of the university.</p></li>
</ul>
<p>Now, that contrast might not mean a THING to someone who's <em>looking</em> for that vastness. I was simply drawn more strongly to a small school and was startled that the differences were so dramatic even from the perspective of a pre-frosh.</p>
<p>Other reasons for my choice included:</p>
<ul>
<li><p>At the time of applying, I didn't know if I wanted to major in engineering or in the humanities. At Berkeley (and actually almost every school I applied to with the exception of Claremont), I had to apply <em>either</em> to a college of engineering <em>or</em> to a college of arts and letters, and I was told that cross-over was possible, but often quite difficult. Claremont, with each school having its own departmental strengths, allowed me the best of all worlds: the small school feel without the limited resources of most comparably sized institutions, the ability to go to a tiny school and not be severely restricted in my choice of major. I was NOT able to limit myself to one end of the spectrum or the other before even starting college and testing deeper waters of various subjects.</p></li>
<li><p>Fit. Fit, fit, fit, fit, fit, fit, fit. I love my pretty dorms, my balconies and my formal living rooms, my grand pianos and mahogany-furnished dining hall. I love that 15 minutes is the longest walk possible, that 60 degree weather is cause for complaint, that people can say "Hey, I know someone who goes there...do you know ____" and I can often reply positively. I like my occasional classes of 8, my usual classes of 12-15, my total lack of giant lectures, the absence of TAs, the 100% focus on undergrads, the likely possibility of personal relationships with professors, the excitement I get from meeting people who HAVE heard of my school, the ease of registration, the fact that I've never not gotten into a class, the undisputed fact that I will graduate in 4 years with no summer school, the fact that my major advisor just emailed me with her home phone number so I could call her up to chat about my looming thesis...it all works for me. I appreciate that I haven't had to dig much to find any of it (or at least I'm <em>trying</em> to appreciate, when it comes to things like that last one there...lol).</p></li>
<li><p>Lots of things that may draw people to bigger schools simply were not factors for me. I don't care about D1 athletics (I have experienced them...I still don't really care), I don't need classes where I'm faceless, I have no desire to get my own apartment and cook for myself, I value personal attention over abundant resources, I get lost easily and hate big campuses, I have zero interest in Greek life, I look to grad school for networking, city life, name-value, and so forth. </p></li>
<li><p>To me, the very biggest draws of Berkeley, in the end, were cost and name. Cost, while the UC tuition would have been convenient, was not a deciding factor and my parents tried (for the most part) to discourage me from taking it too strongly into account. As for name, I figured I could satisfy that with grad school, which I knew I'd be attending. Sure enough, as I start to finalize my list, name value is an important factor. I've done my time at a tiny school and I LOVED it, but now I'm ready for the change. I came from a small high school that held my hand through college application season (the UC application essay was a required and graded summer assignment) and I worried that I could too easily pass up the great opportunities of a big school simply because I wasn't pro-active enough to grab them. Scripps certainly does not coddle its students, but nor does it usually tie us up in obscene amounts of bureaucracy. My best friend is at a UC and I've nearly gone crazy with frustration listening to her try to navigate various offices, departments, and policies. On the rare occasions that I've faced red tape, the worst that's happened is that I've had to walk back and forth between two offices 30 seconds apart from one another.</p></li>
<li><p>In my opinion, it's important to remember that there's more to selecting a school than simply its academic rankings. While you're selecting a school for 4 years, you're also selecting a home. The cost/benefit analysis is personal according to how big the importance of cost and difference in comfort of each school are.</p></li>
</ul>
<p>Those were basically my major reasons for selecting my school the way I did. Big schools offer excellent opportunities, but you often have to be willing to go after them more actively than at a small school. Without cost as a serious concern, and without the knowledge that I would successfully pursue such opportunities, a big school just didn't hold much for me. More than anything, it was just a case of knowing myself and choosing according to where I thought I could be happiest and most successful.</p>
<p>On a final note, it can't be taken for granted that someone who gets in at the top UCs will get in to all Claremont schools, and vice versa. I have a friend at Pomona who was rejected from Berkeley and she can be said, to an extent, to have chosen Claremont for prestige. Among those who count, it will often provide her with greater name value than her alternatives would have.</p>
<p>I imagine that to some degree my parents wish I were one of the kids whose personality and interests inadvertently saved them $30K/year, buuut hey...win some, lose some ;-)</p>
<p>Student615, just a lurking CA parent here but I must say, your post is excellent. Other OPs who are asking the "which college is for me" question should read your post. It is definitely all about fit. My friend's daughter is at Texas A&M. She loves it. We saw the video of their campus visit and my kids could barely not laugh out loud. They saw it as a time warp, weird place that they would not want to visit let alone attend. Now if only that poster who wants to apply to 19 schools could read your post....</p>
<p>Well when your not a california resident... UCs make 0 sense. Why is the cost of my education 15,000 dollars more than the next guy, even though we are going to the same school? Plus, I would rather be treated as more than a statistic.</p>
<p>mike:</p>
<p>have your parents move to Calif and pay income taxes to support the UC system, and you too, can pay in-state tuition rates. Or, perhaps, lobby the NJ Legislature to eliminate its OOS tuition.</p>
<p>I think mike has a point, though. The good thing about great state schools like Berkeley is the fact that you get an awesome value for being an instate resident . When you come from out of state, that value isn't very awesome anymore. You have to pay a close to private school price for a public school.</p>
<p>Put up a Mudder against a Bruin or a Bear and you'll quickly see the difference. We're talking about a completely different kind of education. At HMC and the other Claremont Colleges, the experience is all about YOU.</p>
<p>Let's see. Even though HMC is 15x smaller than UCLA or Berkeley, we send nearly the same number of people to top-notch grad schools like Caltech, MIT, and Stanford. In fact, Sakky said that we send more to Caltech.</p>
<p>I'm sure you've heard of Caltech and MIT. Many people agree that Caltech is a slightly more science-oriented school than MIT...and conversely, MIT is a slightly more engineering-oriented school than Caltech. Harvey Mudd is the West Coast's small-scale version of MIT. </p>
<p>Our PhD productivity is roughly 35%, only second to Caltech. We do, however, have the highest PhD productivity for Chemistry and the Physical Sciences.
<a href="http://web.reed.edu/ir/phd.html%5B/url%5D">http://web.reed.edu/ir/phd.html</a></p>
<p>Advantages of Claremont Colleges:
*Small class size
*Profs know you by name
*Undergrad research opportunities nearly guaranteed
*Cross-registration at any of the 5 Colleges
*Very smart students
*Amazing Professors
*Superb job/career opportunities</p>
<p>Disadvantages:
*No hiding
*Profs know if you skip class
*Very rigorous workload (at least at HMC, perhaps Pomona as well)
*Small student body (5000 students total for 5 colleges)
*Very expensive
*No Div I football teams or what-not.</p>
<p>ebeeeee - Thank you :-)</p>
<p>mike - You raise another excellent point. Claremont and the UC system aren't necessarily drawing from the same pools. Only about 1/3 of Claremont students are CA residents, so for the other 2/3, the UCs aren't the same type of bargain that they are for CA students.</p>
<p>rocket - Juuust on a personal, slightly off-topic note, here...I've gotta stick up for myself! I'm not nuts about your rigorous workload comment (which I might be reading too much into). Mudders can sometimes forget that the other schools' students are working, too, simply because yes...your workload IS above and beyond the rest of ours! But in 2003, Scripps ranked something like #6 on whoever's list of "Students Never Stop Studying." Remember...they might not always be problem sets and lab write-ups, but a thousand pages of reading take time and effort, too! ;-)</p>
<p>Yes, 615, you are correct. There is not a HUGE difference between the college in terms of workload. The main difference is they type of workload that you receive.</p>
<p>Although you may receive a lot of HW, I'm talking about something completely different...getting homework that you mentally cannot do. That is, you can spend 6-8 hours on one problem and get nowhere (so it seems). It can get very depressing when you cannot solve a problem despite having all the time in the world. A lot of HMC coursework is not time-critical work where you know it will be done given enough time. Reading and writing is time-critical...given enough time you can read/write anything. You can't say given enough time you can write a genetic algorithm or design a machine to sort isomeric blocks...because I've tried both of those...and after 100+hours I had no success. I would've rather written a thesis.</p>
<p>Rocket, you list of advantages and disadvantages is pretty biased. There are plenty more disadvantages to going to a small college, such as a muchsmaller offering of majors and courses, a much smaller alumni network, much smaller resources, and a far less diverse student body.</p>
<p>And for that matter, a much smaller offering of student organizations and activities.</p>
<p>
[quote]
More than anything, it was just a case of knowing myself and choosing according to where I thought I could be happiest and most successful.
[/quote]
Student615,</p>
<p>That just about says it all most often, I dont think there is a right and wrong to choosing, but if you know what you want, and a school offers THAT, then you will be happy. Thank you for the eloquent reflection of your sentiments.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Well when your (sic) not a california resident... UCs make 0 sense. Why is the cost of my education 15,000 dollars more than the next guy, even though we are going to the same school? Plus, I would rather be treated as more than a statistic.
[/quote]
Mikethe maddog66,</p>
<p>Im going to guess that you would not care much if it were not for the fact that campuses such as UC Berkeley and UCLA are recognized nationally and internationally as distinguished centers of higher learning? I personally dont accept that anybody who cares will be treated as a mere statistic at the UCs, this coming from somebody who is a product of the system.</p>
<p>The Mission Statement for the University of California system begins: </p>
<p>*We teach - educating students at all levels, from undergraduate to the most advanced graduate level. Undergraduate programs are available to all eligible California high-school graduates and community college transfer students who wish to attend the University of California.[i/]</p>
<p>Note the emphasis on California high school graduates. That the University of California system is recognized worldwide for its excellence in academic programs is to be commended. Its roost and its current mission continues to focus on serving Californians foremost. Thats the way it has been since the origin of UC back in the 1860s. UCs university libraries, art museums, performing arts centers and scientific centers serve as focal points for the communities they exist in. In turn, Californians have supported the UC system in annual tax dollars that residents of other states do not pay. The high school graduates of California have already paid in to the system. To invite others into the finest public university system in the country is also commendable, and to ask out-of-state students to pay more for this privilege of attending is not unreasonable. The cost is still less than that of many private colleges of lesser academic quality and resources. For that matter, it is not even the highest among public universities the University of Michigan holds that distinction. As a university system that is state-sponsored, it is important that the residents of California know that their offspring are able to enjoy privileges in admission and reduced cost of attendance in return for their financial support.</p>
<p>The fact of the matter is that UC is not alone in their practice of charging out-of-state students more in tuition costs the best of the public universities all follow this practice, e.g., University of Michigan, University of Virgina, and University of North Carolina.</p>
<p>thegreatcosby,</p>
<p>My daughter and I went through the same consideration during the past couple of years. Unfortunately, the ultimate choice of a college is multi-layered, and the determining factor for many is the cost of attendance. Because of this, the decision is frequently one not solely determined by the student but reached by a process of family consensus.</p>
<p>My daughter liked Pomona College a great deal early on, and it was her top choice for over a year. At Pomona, it seemed as if every student we encountered had a strong motivation and purpose for being there. I dont know whether they arrived that way or were products of the Pomona environment. Regardless, it had its appeal. In many respects, Pomona served as a benchmark to compare against other schools. We spent more time in our visit to Pomona than any other school. In the end, when all visits were completed, my daughter chose Emory University as the school she would apply to ED. She never applied to Pomona, because she didnt have to having received early acceptance to Emory. As a hedge, she applied to UCB, UCLA, UCSD and UCSB. She would have been completely happy at any of these campuses. Each campus offered its own advantages, but none would offer the intimacy and focused learning opportunities we saw at Pomona. I dont think the UCs would be able to duplicate the smaller environment my daughter liked.</p>
<p>As Student 615 propounds, know yourself well, and the decisions will become much more evident. If cost is not a consideration, the decision is certainly easier to make.</p>
<p>
[quote]
The fact of the matter is that UC is not alone in their practice of charging out-of-state students more in tuition costs the best of the public universities all follow this practice, e.g., University of Michigan, University of Virgina, and University of North Carolina.
[/quote]
Which is precisely the reason to not go to big public school, unless you feel it is a bargain for being instate. Personally, I believe I've worked too hard for to go Rutgers and TCNJ. While I'll admit to being a product of the system of public school, I resent it, but had little options, because I got rejected from all the prep schools I applied too. In the end, I saved my parents a whole lot of money, that will be spent on my higher education, at a private college.</p>
<p>However, back to the topic of this thread. Just as no rankings has the Liberal Arts Colleges mixed with the doctoral universities, the UCs and the Claremonts can't really be compared. Personally, I've had wonderful visits to Harvey Mudd and CMC. They do give off a different ambiance than the large state school. The individualized attention is something you won't necessarily get at the UCs. </p>
<p>
[quote]
There are plenty more disadvantages to going to a small college, such as a muchsmaller offering of majors and courses, a much smaller alumni network, much smaller resources, and a far less diverse student body.</p>
<p>And for that matter, a much smaller offering of student organizations and activities.
[/quote]
These are not really problems I see with the consortium, but with LACs in general. I can see that there is a large amount of majors and courses that are offered throughout the consoritum. One can't complain about the resouces at the Claremont Colleges because, at least from what I saw, they are intent on using that very high Endowment/student ratio on the students. This is not always the case, espcially for U grads at a big graduate research university. There are many different ways to measure diversity. There is much more geographic diversity at the Claremont colleges than the UCs and I may be wrong but there are more URMs at the Claremont colleges than the UCs (per student). I don't know how much a large allumni network is needed if you can prove yourself academically at one of the top colleges in the US. </p>
<p>The point is the consortium makes the claremont colleges unlike normal lacks, because it eliminates some of the inadaquacies that come from a small loberal arts college.</p>
<p>Mike,</p>
<p>Since youre lifting a sentence from my response to you, I can assure you that its being used out of context, and I would disagree that it serves as precisely the reason to not go to big public school.</p>
<p>That public universities provide a reduced cost benefit to in-state students is a factor that has no bearing on whether a school is worthy of consideration. In-state students may get a cost break, but that does not detract from the educational value to be had even for out-of-state students. By your logic, an out-of-state applicant should ignore the caliber of distinguished academic programs, the vibrancy of a great college campus, the access to world-class facilities, the marketable value of a UC degree, and the comfort of wearing flip-flops and shorts in January? I dont think so and I dont think that the many thousands of OOS students (fully cognizant of OOS costs) who apply annually to UCB or UCLA would agree either. To give you a specific example, UCBs College of Engineering is one of the top-ranked in the country, period. I have known students to turn down Princeton to attend UCB, and money had nothing to do with it. Perhaps the academic opportunity to study Materials Sciences or Mechanical Engineering with some of the best faculty in the world may have, though.</p>
<p>Im not discounting your personal biases, but your personal preferences dont support blanket statements that are not valid for all.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Just as no rankings has the Liberal Arts Colleges mixed with the doctoral universities, the UCs and the Claremonts can't really be compared.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I must have missed something this thread is all about comparing the UCs and the Claremont colleges. Its about comparisons and trade-offs between large vs. small, urban vs. suburban, Greek vs. non-Greek, Div. I athletics vs. Div. III, etc. Just as you have your personal preferences, others may have theirs also or conceivably, others preferences may not be as strongly ingrained as yours. I suspect that my daughter would have been happy at Pomona and equally happy at UCLA, despite the contrasts. Each can and does stand on its own merit, and if fortunate to have choices, an applicant can choose the flavor s/he likes best.</p>
<p>I can see that there is a large amount of majors and courses that are offered throughout the consoritum.</p>
<p>I'm talking about how the UCs can offer a lot more.</p>
<p>One can't complain about the resouces at the Claremont Colleges because, at least from what I saw, they are intent on using that very high Endowment/student ratio on the students. This is not always the case, espcially for U grads at a big graduate research university.</p>
<p>endowment per student is only part of the picture. General resources like high-tech facilities and large library systems as well as the creation of various things like hospitals and planetoriums is far more likely to happen in larger universities.</p>
<p>There are many different ways to measure diversity. There is much more geographic diversity at the Claremont colleges than the UCs and I may be wrong but there are more URMs at the Claremont colleges than the UCs (per student).</p>
<p>Racial and economic diversity at the UCs are much greater than what the claremont colleges possess. While geographic diversity is lacking in the UCs, the very size of the university pretty much guarantees a large population of students out of state.</p>
<p>*I don't know how much a large allumni network is needed if you can prove yourself academically at one of the top colleges in the US. *</p>
<p>Let's assume Berkeley and the claremonts have an equal prestige level (in actuality Berkeley is more prestigeous, especially internationally), and students are pretty much equal. Which student is more likely to get the job, the one with the huge alumni network or another guy with a smaller network? A person with few friends is probably more likely to suceed if he had a lot of friends.</p>
<p>It's worth bearing in mind that things like alum network and prestige are MUCH smaller issues for students going on to grad school. Now, this can be interpreted in multiple ways:</p>
<p>(1) You might argue that it's better to attend a UC for undergrad and save your money for a big-name grad school.</p>
<p>(2) You might also say that size and prestige of an undergrad school don't really need to be considered if you realistically plan on attending a big-name grad school.</p>
<p>I know that this isn't applicable to all students, but I think it's still noteworthy.</p>
<p>Also important to remember is that each Claremont school has its own realm of excellence. A Mudder trying to get a job in publishing might not be able to rely on a network of HMC alums, but within his degree area will be another story (still not comparable to a UC, I realize, but nonetheless an improvement).</p>
<p>Furthermore, concerns like availability of majors are only applicable to "undetermined" students. Self-designed degrees are relatively common in Claremont, from architecture to bioethics. No, we have no underwater basketweaving, no Scandinavian studies, but we've got the basics! As for class offerings, I will say that having less (and we still have 2,500+ per year) has been both a blessing and a curse. On the one hand, I look through big schools' course catalogs and am awestruck by all of the amazing, niche courses I come across. But on the other, many people I know who've wound up in such unique courses have only gotten there because required classes or preferable electives have been all filled up. Between a major, minor, and GEs, I have little time for electives and I've got to say I'm sometimes glad not to be torn in 2365 different directions when the chance DOES arise! But that's just horribly indecisive me, and like I said, I feel ambivalent towards the issue. In a way, I strongly agree with the concern, but not nearly enough to make me regret choosing Claremont over a UC. Again, it boils down to a simple issue of personal value.</p>
<p>I am a California resident and I did not even think about applying to UCs. They are excellent undergrad schools and a great bargain for instaters, but I also found many reasons why I would rather go to a small liberal arts college, such as Pomona where I am headed next year
*Price- Because I am lower-income, Pomona is actually cheaper for my family than a UC would ever be. I would most likely have to take out loans in order to go to Berkeley or UCLA while at Pomona I am getting a full scholarship with no loans for all four years.
*The Consortium- the 5 college consortium is a fantastic resource. No I cannot take all the different courses that I would be offered at a UC, but I don't want to take many of those courses anyways. Just because there are more course offerings at bigger schools does not mean that a student would necessarily use them.
*The Size- I wanted a small school and I knew that from the beginning. The biggest school I applied to was around 5000 people and the smallest around 1400. The small size ensures that I will get personal attention but because Pomona is in the Consortium, I can still interact with students from all the other 5 Cs.
Furthermore, I want to go on to grad school later and not only is Pomona a good grad school feeder but as stated earlier, I personally will save money by not taking out loans during undergrad. I think the UCs are excellent; I am seriously thinking about Berkeley for grad/law school. But I would not choose one for undergraduate education.</p>