UNC vs UVA (OOS)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:UVA is closer to DC. More convenient. UNC is heavily instate which can make it harder to make friends coming from out of state.

What does that mean? That they don't like Yankees in North Carolina?

[Anonymous]

There you go. Settled.

https://www.parchment.com/c/college/tools/college-cross-admit-comparison.php?compare=University+of+Virginia&with=University+of+North+Carolina+at+Chapel+Hill

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Research has an impact on the quality of the professors, course offerings and the program, as those are designed by the professors, as well as quality of TA's as those are generally graduate students who choose colleges based on research. More research-accomplished professors also tends to mean more difficult and rigorous coursework. So to say research has no impact is simply untrue. There's a reason the most selective colleges tend to be research behemoths, and colleges like Cal Tech and MIT have more grad students than undergrads. UVA is actually rather alone in selective national universities in terms of its lack of research, although Georgetown and Notre Dame are also two other national universities that lack research, and Washington University's (and to a smaller extent Johns Hopkin's) reputation is primarily based on its medical school research than other subjects.

Well Dartmouth and Brown must suck as well for undergraduate study, then. Lower research than UVA.

Private schools are better equipped to provide both research and quality education (i.e. Princeton). At large public research universities, the large research program is financed to a significant extent by sucking it out of the undergraduate program. At UNC the $1.1B in "funded" research includes $278M coming from institutional funds (per NSF data). That's student tuition and fees at work, funding stuff that has nothing to do with instruction.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Research has an impact on the quality of the professors, course offerings and the program, as those are designed by the professors, as well as quality of TA's as those are generally graduate students who choose colleges based on research. More research-accomplished professors also tends to mean more difficult and rigorous coursework. So to say research has no impact is simply untrue. There's a reason the most selective colleges tend to be research behemoths, and colleges like Cal Tech and MIT have more grad students than undergrads. UVA is actually rather alone in selective national universities in terms of its lack of research, although Georgetown and Notre Dame are also two other national universities that lack research, and Washington University's (and to a smaller extent Johns Hopkin's) reputation is primarily based on its medical school research than other subjects.

Well Dartmouth and Brown must suck as well for undergraduate study, then. Lower research than UVA.

Private schools are better equipped to provide both research and quality education (i.e. Princeton). At large public research universities, the large research program is financed to a significant extent by sucking it out of the undergraduate program. At UNC the $1.1B in "funded" research includes $278M coming from institutional funds (per NSF data). That's student tuition and fees at work, funding stuff that has nothing to do with instruction.

UVA is not Darthmouth or Brown. To begin with, UVA has 16000 students, Darmouth has 4000 and Brown has 7000.

Compare Darthmouth/Brown to its peers in size and the value provided by research. Harvard, MIT, Stanford are similar sized and far more academically-respected throughout the world. That's not to say that Darthmouth/Brown students are academically less talented than Harvard/MIT/Stanford, but that the research conducted by Harvard/MIT/Stanford brings them great academic prestige around the world.

The "best" colleges are either heavily research-heavy universities or they are 1000-2000 student small LACs that provide extremely small class sizes. UVA is a large public state school, it is not a LAC.

External research funding directly aids universities with paying the salaries of professors, meaning less institutional funds needs to go to instructors. Ironically this means the opposite of your conclusion: its universities with weaker research that have to pay a larger portion of professors salaries from undergraduate tuition.

The reason to go to UVA over UNC is, again:
1. Probably marginally academically-better median student due to in-state/out-of-state ratios and NOVA school students in UVA
2. Much larger endowment which results in better future standing
3. North Carolina's Republican legislature has been obsessed with cutting funding for their public institutions over the last decade. Virginia has done the same but UVA has more funding from alumni

"Better undergraduate education", on the other hand, is heavily questionable. The schools are 16,000 vs 18,000 in size. In non-research heavy universities, certain major departments can be incredibly decrepit due to professors that don't design courses and programs to be up-to-date. Research opportunities matter for top-students that care about medical or graduate school. Smaller class sizes provided by small LAC's simply don't apply to UVA because its a large state school.

"Better reputation" is, again, heavily questionable. Among USNews readers and DC metro area, UVA probably has a slightly better reputation. Among academics throughout the country and the world, UNC probably has a slightly better reputation due to its overall research, or a lot better reputation on a given field. Among laypersons, both are good state colleges with good basketball teams.

[Anonymous]

No skin in the game (yet) but reading the thread with interest. We hope in two years that our daughter will have the same "problem" as OP's daughter!

Here is my two cents. If we ever have this choice, then I want our daughter to go with UNC just because the UVA posters seem so insecure. Both schools will provide a good 4 year experience. However, the outcomes I am seeing on this thread reflect more than one very agitated UVA poster while the UNC posters seem to have walked away.

I want out daughter to go to a school where she will emerge healthy and well-rounded. I do not want our daughter to go to a school where she will emerge neurotic and hyper-focused on perceived slights while continuing to argue minute points.

UVA booster/s: think about how your actions reflect on your university. Agree that both schools have good points. And then stop.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Research has an impact on the quality of the professors, course offerings and the program, as those are designed by the professors, as well as quality of TA's as those are generally graduate students who choose colleges based on research. More research-accomplished professors also tends to mean more difficult and rigorous coursework. So to say research has no impact is simply untrue. There's a reason the most selective colleges tend to be research behemoths, and colleges like Cal Tech and MIT have more grad students than undergrads. UVA is actually rather alone in selective national universities in terms of its lack of research, although Georgetown and Notre Dame are also two other national universities that lack research, and Washington University's (and to a smaller extent Johns Hopkin's) reputation is primarily based on its medical school research than other subjects.

Well Dartmouth and Brown must suck as well for undergraduate study, then. Lower research than UVA.

Private schools are better equipped to provide both research and quality education (i.e. Princeton). At large public research universities, the large research program is financed to a significant extent by sucking it out of the undergraduate program. At UNC the $1.1B in "funded" research includes $278M coming from institutional funds (per NSF data). That's student tuition and fees at work, funding stuff that has nothing to do with instruction.

UVA is not Darthmouth or Brown. To begin with, UVA has 16000 students, Darmouth has 4000 and Brown has 7000.

Compare Darthmouth/Brown to its peers in size and the value provided by research. Harvard, MIT, Stanford are similar sized and far more academically-respected throughout the world. That's not to say that Darthmouth/Brown students are academically less talented than Harvard/MIT/Stanford, but that the research conducted by Harvard/MIT/Stanford brings them great academic prestige around the world.

The "best" colleges are either heavily research-heavy universities or they are 1000-2000 student small LACs that provide extremely small class sizes. UVA is a large public state school, it is not a LAC.

External research funding directly aids universities with paying the salaries of professors, meaning less institutional funds needs to go to instructors. Ironically this means the opposite of your conclusion: its universities with weaker research that have to pay a larger portion of professors salaries from undergraduate tuition.

The reason to go to UVA over UNC is, again:
1. Probably marginally academically-better median student due to in-state/out-of-state ratios and NOVA school students in UVA
2. Much larger endowment which results in better future standing
3. North Carolina's Republican legislature has been obsessed with cutting funding for their public institutions over the last decade. Virginia has done the same but UVA has more funding from alumni

"Better undergraduate education", on the other hand, is heavily questionable. The schools are 16,000 vs 18,000 in size. In non-research heavy universities, certain major departments can be incredibly decrepit due to professors that don't design courses and programs to be up-to-date. Research opportunities matter for top-students that care about medical or graduate school. Smaller class sizes provided by small LAC's simply don't apply to UVA because its a large state school.

"Better reputation" is, again, heavily questionable. Among USNews readers and DC metro area, UVA probably has a slightly better reputation. Among academics throughout the country and the world, UNC probably has a slightly better reputation due to its overall research, or a lot better reputation on a given field. Among laypersons, both are good state colleges with good basketball teams.

Tuition and state appropriations can and are used to fund research. External research grants cannot be used to fund teaching. Money and time flows one way, away from undergraduates.

[Anonymous]

External research grants can be used to fund professors. These professors then may be paid a small portion of their salary from the university while a large percent of their salary comes from the grant. Furthermore a portion of research money is dedicated to university functions i.e. building expenses, etc.

Meanwhile, universities with less research may have to pay the entirety of the professor's salary with university funds.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:No skin in the game (yet) but reading the thread with interest. We hope in two years that our daughter will have the same "problem" as OP's daughter!

Here is my two cents. If we ever have this choice, then I want our daughter to go with UNC just because the UVA posters seem so insecure. Both schools will provide a good 4 year experience. However, the outcomes I am seeing on this thread reflect more than one very agitated UVA poster while the UNC posters seem to have walked away.

I want out daughter to go to a school where she will emerge healthy and well-rounded. I do not want our daughter to go to a school where she will emerge neurotic and hyper-focused on perceived slights while continuing to argue minute points.

UVA booster/s: think about how your actions reflect on your university. Agree that both schools have good points. And then stop.

I have seen both UNC and UVA boosters trying to disparage the others on this thread.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:All this talk about funding and research capabilities is fine, but I was hoping someone with direct experience might comment on a PP's question about "babes" and which school leads in that department.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.esquire.com/lifestyle/sex/news/amp52732/most-attractive-colleges/
I’m guessing babes is women, so out of luck. UNC men make the cut though.

[Anonymous]

Suppose for the sake of argument that my kid can't get into either UVA or UNC.

Should he look at JMU? Or maybe East Carolina?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:UVA for sure. UVA is a higher ranked school and enjoys international reputation. 80%+ of UNC are in-state.

I don't think UVA has a better international reputation. Lived for quite a while in the UK. Neither is going to be well known there. Best known schools are Harvard, MIT, Stanford, Caltech (top a number of years in a row on UK global ranking), Yale, Penn (Wharton), etc.

Yes it does compared to UNC. No one has heard of UNC in Singapore, Hong Kong or Shanghai. But UVA is well known there.

Have been there as well. Not in my experience. Neither one will be well known.

You don't speak and read their language. You have no idea really. UVA has more successful alumni who work all over the world. Especially in the business world of Singapore, HK or Shanghai, UVA is a better known school than UNC for sure. UNC is mostly a regional school serving for NC only.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:UVA for sure. UVA is a higher ranked school and enjoys international reputation. 80%+ of UNC are in-state.

I don't think UVA has a better international reputation. Lived for quite a while in the UK. Neither is going to be well known there. Best known schools are Harvard, MIT, Stanford, Caltech (top a number of years in a row on UK global ranking), Yale, Penn (Wharton), etc.

Yes it does compared to UNC. No one has heard of UNC in Singapore, Hong Kong or Shanghai. But UVA is well known there.

Have been there as well. Not in my experience. Neither one will be well known.

You don't speak and read their language. You have no idea really. UVA has more successful alumni who work all over the world. Especially in the business world of Singapore, HK or Shanghai, UVA is a better known school than UNC for sure. UNC is mostly a regional school serving for NC only.

What's wrong with this? Shouldn't all state schools operate for the purpose of serving the citizens of the states in which they are located? Does UVA have a different mission? If so, why doesn't it become a private institution?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:UVA for sure. UVA is a higher ranked school and enjoys international reputation. 80%+ of UNC are in-state.

I don't think UVA has a better international reputation. Lived for quite a while in the UK. Neither is going to be well known there. Best known schools are Harvard, MIT, Stanford, Caltech (top a number of years in a row on UK global ranking), Yale, Penn (Wharton), etc.

Yes it does compared to UNC. No one has heard of UNC in Singapore, Hong Kong or Shanghai. But UVA is well known there.

Have been there as well. Not in my experience. Neither one will be well known.

You don't speak and read their language. You have no idea really. UVA has more successful alumni who work all over the world. Especially in the business world of Singapore, HK or Shanghai, UVA is a better known school than UNC for sure. UNC is mostly a regional school serving for NC only.

This is a rather incredibly anecdotal point that shouldn't be used in making decisions at all. The US state schools that will be known overseas in Asia are Berkeley, UCLA, Michigan and possibly Washington.

[Anonymous]

UNC.

I got into UVA instate and UNC OOS and I picked UNC and was very happy with my decision. I did not know anyone before I went to school there. I had no problem making friends. I had a very positive 4 years. I visited UVA often to stay with friends and even spent a summer there living on U Circle iwth a bunch of Thetas and Tri Delts and working at the Biltmore, and I had a great time.

The schools and towns are very different. IMO, UVA and Charlottesville are more preppy, conservative and less diverse. You're going to have a huge Richmond crowd who will be sticking together. The greek scene at UVA is huge, still today.
But it's OOS vs Instate ratio is used a budget balancing method, hence more OOS than UNC. We used to refer to it as Duke lite.

UNC is unapologetically an instate school to serve primarily NC students. Their instate ratio almost never changes, usually lower than 20% (and it's debatable whether the OOS state athletes fall into that calculation). It is harder to get into UNC OOS than UVA. it just is. UNC is a very diverse school, socio-economically, racially, politically. The greek system is quite small compared to the size of the school, so the greek life does not rule the social scene. Sports games and school spirit are very high. Chapel Hill is much smaller than Charlottesville, but you've got Durham just down the road on 15-501 and Carborro in the other direction, and you're not far from Raleigh. You'll have your Charlotte, Raleigh, and Greensboro gangs, but I didn't find them to be insular and made friends easily with friend groups that had known each other since grade school (and it's not like I am super popular or anything). The vibe at UNC is more liberal and laid back, less preppy.

Both are great schools. Even though I am a Tar Heel, I would be thrilled if my kid got into UVA. I think it would be wise for your child to consider which environment they want and consider the cost. But I don't think you can make a bad choice between these two. Congrats.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:UNC.

I got into UVA instate and UNC OOS and I picked UNC and was very happy with my decision. I did not know anyone before I went to school there. I had no problem making friends. I had a very positive 4 years. I visited UVA often to stay with friends and even spent a summer there living on U Circle iwth a bunch of Thetas and Tri Delts and working at the Biltmore, and I had a great time.

The schools and towns are very different. IMO, UVA and Charlottesville are more preppy, conservative and less diverse. You're going to have a huge Richmond crowd who will be sticking together. The greek scene at UVA is huge, still today.
But it's OOS vs Instate ratio is used a budget balancing method, hence more OOS than UNC. We used to refer to it as Duke lite.

UNC is unapologetically an instate school to serve primarily NC students. Their instate ratio almost never changes, usually lower than 20% (and it's debatable whether the OOS state athletes fall into that calculation). It is harder to get into UNC OOS than UVA. it just is. UNC is a very diverse school, socio-economically, racially, politically. The greek system is quite small compared to the size of the school, so the greek life does not rule the social scene. Sports games and school spirit are very high. Chapel Hill is much smaller than Charlottesville, but you've got Durham just down the road on 15-501 and Carborro in the other direction, and you're not far from Raleigh. You'll have your Charlotte, Raleigh, and Greensboro gangs, but I didn't find them to be insular and made friends easily with friend groups that had known each other since grade school (and it's not like I am super popular or anything). The vibe at UNC is more liberal and laid back, less preppy.

Both are great schools. Even though I am a Tar Heel, I would be thrilled if my kid got into UVA. I think it would be wise for your child to consider which environment they want and consider the cost. But I don't think you can make a bad choice between these two. Congrats.

After carefully reading your thorough comparison of the two schools, I think I too would be thrilled to have my kid go to UVA.