Duke vs. UVA (In-State)?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I went to an Ivy but was accepted to both Duke and UVA.

Duke offers more of an Ivy-like experience, but think Dartmouth-like behavior in faux-Princeton buildings with some Penn-like professional schools. I’m not sure the arrogant frat-boy culture at Duke is unique, but it is more obvious because the frats are right in the center of West Campus (or at least they used to be), not on the fringe as at many schools.

UVA has certain elements of a private-school culture, due to its history and location, but once you get outside the main grounds it’s basically like any other state university, which means most live off-campus and have to take ownership of their education because they aren’t going to be coddled like they would be at some pricey SLAC.

This. OP raised a wrong question.

Yes Duke is only marginally better in terms of reputation. And yes UVa is definetely cheaper. But why is UVa so much cheaper? Obviosly that’s because it’s a state school. So how come so many parents send their kids to pricey private colleges when they can send kids to cheaper public institutes? That’s because there are other intangibles that they can obtain only at private schools like better student care, connections with wealthy people, etc.

So the question should be whether the OP should pay the premium for those intangibles (plus marginally better reputation) at Duke.

You're clueless. UVA has one of the highest graduation rates in the country -- again, higher than Duke -- which is as good a proxy as any for "student care." It also has one of the wealthiest student bodies in America.

Try again.

Is that 1) a good thing? and 2) is it true? New York Times diversity analysis shows UVA at number 79 in median family income, which is high, but not among wealthiest. Colorado College at #1 was at $278K median vs. $156K for UVA. Duke was at $187K.

Wow, the difference between $187K and $156K is YUGE. That's, what, one vacation to Aspen?

Do you want to go to a college with the wealthiest students? A number of the privates use their wealth to provide more attractive financial aid for low to middle income families. As a result, they can be lower than publics in median income. Columbia and Cornell have lower median incomes than publics William & Mary, UVA, and Michigan. Wellesley is lower than Virginia Tech.

[Anonymous]

The reason UVA is “cheaper” is that OOS students pay double and subsidize the IS students.

I wonder where else the person who automatically thinks higher tuition means higher value is paying too much and feeling good about it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I went to an Ivy but was accepted to both Duke and UVA.

Duke offers more of an Ivy-like experience, but think Dartmouth-like behavior in faux-Princeton buildings with some Penn-like professional schools. I’m not sure the arrogant frat-boy culture at Duke is unique, but it is more obvious because the frats are right in the center of West Campus (or at least they used to be), not on the fringe as at many schools.

UVA has certain elements of a private-school culture, due to its history and location, but once you get outside the main grounds it’s basically like any other state university, which means most live off-campus and have to take ownership of their education because they aren’t going to be coddled like they would be at some pricey SLAC.

This. OP raised a wrong question.

Yes Duke is only marginally better in terms of reputation. And yes UVa is definetely cheaper. But why is UVa so much cheaper? Obviosly that’s because it’s a state school. So how come so many parents send their kids to pricey private colleges when they can send kids to cheaper public institutes? That’s because there are other intangibles that they can obtain only at private schools like better student care, connections with wealthy people, etc.

So the question should be whether the OP should pay the premium for those intangibles (plus marginally better reputation) at Duke.

You're clueless. UVA has one of the highest graduation rates in the country -- again, higher than Duke -- which is as good a proxy as any for "student care." It also has one of the wealthiest student bodies in America.

Try again.

Sorry but your posting is clueless. Yes UVa has the high graduation rate. That may mean a good student care. But it may also mean being easy to graduate. Your second point is hard to believe. Most UVa kids I know are from middle class. After all, if money is not an issue, why would you choose UVa over Duke?

Visited both schools. Money is not an issue. DD likes UVA better. That’s it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The reason UVA is “cheaper” is that OOS students pay double and subsidize the IS students.

I wonder where else the person who automatically thinks higher tuition means higher value is paying too much and feeling good about it.

The reason the top privates have risen to the top in USNWR is because they can have all wealthy students subsidize the less wealthy. They have more generous financial aid to provide. If you look at the loan amounts for graduates of these top privates, they can be less than public schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The reason UVA is “cheaper” is that OOS students pay double and subsidize the IS students.

I wonder where else the person who automatically thinks higher tuition means higher value is paying too much and feeling good about it.

The reason the top privates have risen to the top in USNWR is because they can have all wealthy students subsidize the less wealthy. They have more generous financial aid to provide. If you look at the loan amounts for graduates of these top privates, they can be less than public schools.

It's the $25 and 40 BILLION dollar endowments that allow Harvard and Princeton to do that. They don't operate off tuition with the return they're getting on that pile of money.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The reason UVA is “cheaper” is that OOS students pay double and subsidize the IS students.

I wonder where else the person who automatically thinks higher tuition means higher value is paying too much and feeling good about it.

The reason the top privates have risen to the top in USNWR is because they can have all wealthy students subsidize the less wealthy. They have more generous financial aid to provide. If you look at the loan amounts for graduates of these top privates, they can be less than public schools.

It's the $25 and 40 BILLION dollar endowments that allow Harvard and Princeton to do that. They don't operate off tuition with the return they're getting on that pile of money.

80%+ of endowment money is restricted by donors. A research professorship doesn't pay for financial aid. Athletic scholarships don't pay for financial aid. And think about which division has the money. Harvard Business School isn't going to let its multi-billion endowment go to undergraduate financial aid. The medical school an law schools aren't going to let its endowment to undergraduate financial aid. Much of what these schools do is operate on a high tuition/high aid model. Endowments are typically donor targeted. The exception is what Bloomberg recently did at Hopkins.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The reason UVA is “cheaper” is that OOS students pay double and subsidize the IS students.

I wonder where else the person who automatically thinks higher tuition means higher value is paying too much and feeling good about it.

The reason the top privates have risen to the top in USNWR is because they can have all wealthy students subsidize the less wealthy. They have more generous financial aid to provide. If you look at the loan amounts for graduates of these top privates, they can be less than public schools.

It's the $25 and 40 BILLION dollar endowments that allow Harvard and Princeton to do that. They don't operate off tuition with the return they're getting on that pile of money.

80%+ of endowment money is restricted by donors. A research professorship doesn't pay for financial aid. Athletic scholarships don't pay for financial aid. And think about which division has the money. Harvard Business School isn't going to let its multi-billion endowment go to undergraduate financial aid. The medical school an law schools aren't going to let its endowment to undergraduate financial aid. Much of what these schools do is operate on a high tuition/high aid model. Endowments are typically donor targeted. The exception is what Bloomberg recently did at Hopkins.

To illustrate, the endowment split not too long ago at UVA was 31% medicine, 10% athletics, 9% Darden, 4% Law. Do you think the owners of that 54% want their funds going to undergraduate scholarships? The biggest undergraduate school at UVA was A&S, which only had 13% of the endowment, and this is split between undergraduates and graduates. The bulk of financial aid money comes from redistribution of tuition revenue.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:UVA is more like 13th grade judging from my DC's friends. They are all still hanging out with the same people they did in high school. Duke would allow your DC to meet people from all over the US and the world. But kids from the WDC area are already pretty worldly, so it depends on your kid, what connections they have now, and their future plans.

I would not encourage anyone to go to Duke however after what the Gang of 88 did. There's a Town and Gown problem in Durham, but there's also a faculty vs. student problem. I can't speak for UVA, but my DC chose their school based on how supportive and encouraging the faculty members were at accepted students' weekend.

This is why Duke wasn't even on our shopping list. That Gang of 88 is still there.

It was bad, but I think most elite schools would have had faculty respond in a similar way. The elite schools seem to be largely immune to scandal for some reason.

It was terrible for the unindicted men. Terrible. And the faculty ignorantly and blatantly joined in the attack. I would never send any relative of mine to Duke. Ever.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The reason UVA is “cheaper” is that OOS students pay double and subsidize the IS students.

I wonder where else the person who automatically thinks higher tuition means higher value is paying too much and feeling good about it.

The reason the top privates have risen to the top in USNWR is because they can have all wealthy students subsidize the less wealthy. They have more generous financial aid to provide. If you look at the loan amounts for graduates of these top privates, they can be less than public schools.

But you are forgetting that public universities are already discounted from privates. I'm not paying 80K in after tax income (I'd have to make 140K a year) to send my kid to a private lac for five years when they can go to UVA for $16,000 a year (tuition only) and get done in four years and then go on to grad school at $100K a year +. Spend the money for grad school, not undergrad.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't understand what you are saying about business and law school rankings. Your kid will be an undergrad and here are some considerations:

1. UVA has an undergrad business program, which you apply to as an undergrad for the last two years. Duke actually does not have any undergrad business.

2. Not sure what law has to do with it. Law isn't an undergrad major and if you want to go to a good law school, get a good LSAT score and a good GPA in anything.

But UVA offers an Honors seminar program in politics (if you can get into it) and a major in Politics, Philosophy and the Law. It's law school is one of the most selective in the nation. My DS's roommate got into Duke Law but not UVA.

So what?

The PP says "not sure what law has to do with it . . Law isn't and undergrad major". PP was answering the question. Also, it's more difficult statistically to get into UVA law than Duke. UVA feeds into UVA Law.

Princeton doesn't have a law school so those poor bastard undergraduates stand no change of going to law school.

I know you are being sarcastic but Princeton grads do have a problem with that because of PRinceton's grade deflation. the T-14 law schools are looking at GPA to report. They know Princeton grades hard but when it comes to taking someone with a 4.0 from a SLAC v. a 3.32 from Princeton, most schools trying to climb that rankings list will go with the 4.0.

I doubt that any schools have grade deflation. Princeton might have tougher grading than Brown (pretty much all schools have tougher grading than Brown), but still relatively high GPAs on average. Yale Law, which is generally considered the most selective law school, publishes periodically the undergraduate institutions of its students. Princeton was 3rd behind Yale and Harvard.

Google is your friend. Princeton has grade deflation. I have personal experience with it. https://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2013/10/end-grade-deflation-princeton-university-inflation-as/310231/

Math is also your friend. What is the overall GPA trend below? What you are looking at was really an abandoned attempt to stem inflation. https://qz.com/277288/princeton-is-giving-up-ground-in-its-fight-against-grade-inflation/

1969 2.83
1971 2.94
1972 2.96
1973 2.99
1974 3.04
1975 3.04
1976 3.06
1977 3.09
1978 3.10
1979 3.12
1980 3.10
1981 3.10
1982 3.11
1983 3.11
1984 3.11
1985 3.12
1986 3.12
1987 3.16
1988 3.15
1989 3.16
1990 3.17
1991 3.19
1992 3.21
1993 3.22
1994 3.25
1995 3.26
1997 3.34
1998 3.33
1999 3.35
2000 3.37
2001 3.36
2002 3.38
2003 3.35
2004 3.34
2005 3.29
2006 3.28
2007 3.28
2008 3.29
2009 3.28
2010 3.29
2011 3.29
2012 3.31
2013 3.32
2014 3.39

And all of those GPAs are lower than almost all other universities in the nation. You want to get into a T-14 law school? You need a 3.6 or of higher to get in.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The reason UVA is “cheaper” is that OOS students pay double and subsidize the IS students.

I wonder where else the person who automatically thinks higher tuition means higher value is paying too much and feeling good about it.

That may be the case, but $60K i(OSS) s still lower than $80K a year which is what my SLAC is charging.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm glad that kids are branching out at UVA. It may be a plus that they like their high school friends and want to keep hanging out with them. No need to get so defensive there Hoos.

No one is being defensive. Just pointing out that, with the possible exception of TJ, Virginia public high schools aren't sending whole hordes of friends off to UVA together. Admissions are too competitive. In my case, two daughters went to UVA but none of their close friends got in.

TJ is about 2% or less of UVA and W&M undergraduate enrollment. That isn't that big of a concentration from one school. And some of the high schools are so large that the students that attend may not have even known each other other than in passing.

That's why I said [b]possible exception. But c'mon, if 100+ kids from the same high school go to the same college chances are there are good friends among them.

[/b]


Name one single high school that sends (actually sends) 100 students to UVA. You can't do it. Even Langley and McLean send only a few - they might have a larger aount accepted but that's not the same and entering. The very top students in VA use UVA as a backup in case they don't get into Ivy (case in point my DD). Even in her mega public high school only six actually showed up at UVA. The myth of 13th year of high school is totally a myth by those who couldn't get iin. In my DS's school, only two got into UVA and both went. They never have seen each other since the first year.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I went to an Ivy but was accepted to both Duke and UVA.

Duke offers more of an Ivy-like experience, but think Dartmouth-like behavior in faux-Princeton buildings with some Penn-like professional schools. I’m not sure the arrogant frat-boy culture at Duke is unique, but it is more obvious because the frats are right in the center of West Campus (or at least they used to be), not on the fringe as at many schools.

UVA has certain elements of a private-school culture, due to its history and location, but once you get outside the main grounds it’s basically like any other state university, which means most live off-campus and have to take ownership of their education because they aren’t going to be coddled like they would be at some pricey SLAC.

This. OP raised a wrong question.

Yes Duke is only marginally better in terms of reputation. And yes UVa is definetely cheaper. But why is UVa so much cheaper? Obviosly that’s because it’s a state school. So how come so many parents send their kids to pricey private colleges when they can send kids to cheaper public institutes? That’s because there are other intangibles that they can obtain only at private schools like better student care, connections with wealthy people, etc.
\

But I think that is the point of this thread. Those "intangibles" of going to Duke v a great flagship no longer exist. Once upon a time when there wasn't such a huge difference in cost yes maybe it made sense to spend that kind of money on undergraduate but now the smart money is sending their children for undergraduate to state flagships and then saving their money for grad school which can be over 100K a year. Everyone now is expected to have an undergrad degree. That wasn't the case 25 years ago. It's absurd to spend these prices at $80K a year on "intangibles" when you can get a great education at a state university or even better, go community college for two years and enter UVA or UCLA or Berkeley on the guaranteed admission program. That's where the smart money is now.

So the question should be whether the OP should pay the premium for those intangibles (plus marginally better reputation) at Duke.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't understand what you are saying about business and law school rankings. Your kid will be an undergrad and here are some considerations:

1. UVA has an undergrad business program, which you apply to as an undergrad for the last two years. Duke actually does not have any undergrad business.

2. Not sure what law has to do with it. Law isn't an undergrad major and if you want to go to a good law school, get a good LSAT score and a good GPA in anything.

But UVA offers an Honors seminar program in politics (if you can get into it) and a major in Politics, Philosophy and the Law. It's law school is one of the most selective in the nation. My DS's roommate got into Duke Law but not UVA.

So what?

The PP says "not sure what law has to do with it . . Law isn't and undergrad major". PP was answering the question. Also, it's more difficult statistically to get into UVA law than Duke. UVA feeds into UVA Law.

Princeton doesn't have a law school so those poor bastard undergraduates stand no change of going to law school.

I know you are being sarcastic but Princeton grads do have a problem with that because of PRinceton's grade deflation. the T-14 law schools are looking at GPA to report. They know Princeton grades hard but when it comes to taking someone with a 4.0 from a SLAC v. a 3.32 from Princeton, most schools trying to climb that rankings list will go with the 4.0.

I doubt that any schools have grade deflation. Princeton might have tougher grading than Brown (pretty much all schools have tougher grading than Brown), but still relatively high GPAs on average. Yale Law, which is generally considered the most selective law school, publishes periodically the undergraduate institutions of its students. Princeton was 3rd behind Yale and Harvard.

Google is your friend. Princeton has grade deflation. I have personal experience with it. https://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2013/10/end-grade-deflation-princeton-university-inflation-as/310231/

Math is also your friend. What is the overall GPA trend below? What you are looking at was really an abandoned attempt to stem inflation. https://qz.com/277288/princeton-is-giving-up-ground-in-its-fight-against-grade-inflation/

1969 2.83
1971 2.94
1972 2.96
1973 2.99
1974 3.04
1975 3.04
1976 3.06
1977 3.09
1978 3.10
1979 3.12
1980 3.10
1981 3.10
1982 3.11
1983 3.11
1984 3.11
1985 3.12
1986 3.12
1987 3.16
1988 3.15
1989 3.16
1990 3.17
1991 3.19
1992 3.21
1993 3.22
1994 3.25
1995 3.26
1997 3.34
1998 3.33
1999 3.35
2000 3.37
2001 3.36
2002 3.38
2003 3.35
2004 3.34
2005 3.29
2006 3.28
2007 3.28
2008 3.29
2009 3.28
2010 3.29
2011 3.29
2012 3.31
2013 3.32
2014 3.39

And all of those GPAs are lower than almost all other universities in the nation. You want to get into a T-14 law school? You need a 3.6 or of higher to get in.

They are not lower than "almost all other universities in the nation". You can see that on Gradeinflation.com. They are on the low end of the most elite schools. But the most elite schools have the highest average GPAs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The reason UVA is “cheaper” is that OOS students pay double and subsidize the IS students.

I wonder where else the person who automatically thinks higher tuition means higher value is paying too much and feeling good about it.

The reason the top privates have risen to the top in USNWR is because they can have all wealthy students subsidize the less wealthy. They have more generous financial aid to provide. If you look at the loan amounts for graduates of these top privates, they can be less than public schools.

But you are forgetting that public universities are already discounted from privates. I'm not paying 80K in after tax income (I'd have to make 140K a year) to send my kid to a private lac for five years when they can go to UVA for $16,000 a year (tuition only) and get done in four years and then go on to grad school at $100K a year +. Spend the money for grad school, not undergrad.

I'm forgetting nothing. The financial model of being able to charge all affluent students full freight (vs. just OOS) has given privates a financial advantage they have used to climb in USNWR vs publics. They have more money to play with and they used that to their advantage.