UNC vs UVA (OOS)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Um, ok, was that really necessary?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Um, ok, was that really necessary?

Yes. Necessary and sufficient. And based entirely on the information/observations you provided.

[Anonymous]

OP here. She is officially a Tar Heel!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Um, ok, was that really necessary?

Yes. Necessary and sufficient. And based entirely on the information/observations you provided.

If you say so, no skin off my teeth. We won't miss you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:OP here. She is officially a Tar Heel!

Woohoo! Right choice all the way!!!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:OP here. She is officially a Tar Heel!

Congrats, OP. But I think she is, properly speaking, preparing to become a Tar Heel.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:OP here. She is officially a Tar Heel!

GDTBATH!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:OP here. She is officially a Tar Heel!

Congrats. What were the deciding factors?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP here. She is officially a Tar Heel!

Congrats. What were the deciding factors?

Cost, science seemed to be a little stronger, and just overall felt a slight draw to UNC intangibly. One of those things you can’t really explain.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote: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.

Research grants are typically restricted to purpose. Tuition is unrestricted. From a Council on Government Relations report authored by university aministrators:

"Sources of revenue for both public and private research universities can be divided into
unrestricted and restricted resources. Unrestricted resources can be used at the discretion
of the institution for the primary missions of teaching, research, public service, or any
other activity. The primary unrestricted sources for operations are state appropriations
(public) and tuition (both public and private). Restricted resources are those that are
limited in use by third parties, such as donors and research sponsors. Restrictions are
typically related to the use of the resources for a particular organizational unit (e.g., the
physics department), to a particular purpose (e.g., music scholarships), or to a specific
activity (e.g., NIH-funded cancer research). "

"Revenue that supports a federally sponsored research program is required by the sponsor to have a one-to-one relationship
with the expenditures for that program. On the other hand, revenue sources that are
unrestricted, such as state appropriations and tuition, support a wide range of institutional
activities, including teaching, student services, and administration; the one-to-one
revenue-expenditure relationship does not exist. Instead, a single, limited pool of
unrestricted revenue is expended according to the competing needs and priorities of the
university."

Authors include: James Luther, Committee Chairman Cynthia Hope
Duke University University of Alabama
James Barbret Terry Johnson
Wayne State University University of Iowa
Sara Bible Ron Maples
Stanford University University of Tennessee System
Mary Lee Brown Kim Moreland
University of Pennsylvania University of Wisconsin
Michael Daniels Ryan Rapp (Volunteer)
Northwestern University University of Missouri System
Kelvin Droegemeier John Shipley
University of Oklahoma University of Miami
Dan Evon Cathy Snyder
Michigan State University Vanderbilt University
Jill Ferguson (Volunteer and Editor) Eric Vermillion (Retired)
University of Missouri, Columbia University of California,
San Francisco

About 30% of research budget comes from institutional funding on average, since the grants don't cover all costs. A significant part of that likely comes from unrestricted funds (tuition, state appropriations). So again I dispute your claim that more research is necessarily better from an undergraduate education point of view.

https://www.cogr.edu/COGR/files/ccLibraryFiles/Filename/000000000267/Finances%20of%20Research%20Universities_June%202014.pdf

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:OP here. She is officially a Tar Heel!

I'm sure she'll have a great experience. Fingers crossed that things are back to normal when she starts in the fall.

[Anonymous]

Congrats OP! Always nice to see someone get in where they are really excited to go!

[Anonymous]

HEELS! Congrats. A great place to spend 4 years.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: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.

Research grants are typically restricted to purpose. Tuition is unrestricted. From a Council on Government Relations report authored by university aministrators:

"Sources of revenue for both public and private research universities can be divided into
unrestricted and restricted resources. Unrestricted resources can be used at the discretion
of the institution for the primary missions of teaching, research, public service, or any
other activity. The primary unrestricted sources for operations are state appropriations
(public) and tuition (both public and private). Restricted resources are those that are
limited in use by third parties, such as donors and research sponsors. Restrictions are
typically related to the use of the resources for a particular organizational unit (e.g., the
physics department), to a particular purpose (e.g., music scholarships), or to a specific
activity (e.g., NIH-funded cancer research). "

"Revenue that supports a federally sponsored research program is required by the sponsor to have a one-to-one relationship
with the expenditures for that program. On the other hand, revenue sources that are
unrestricted, such as state appropriations and tuition, support a wide range of institutional
activities, including teaching, student services, and administration; the one-to-one
revenue-expenditure relationship does not exist. Instead, a single, limited pool of
unrestricted revenue is expended according to the competing needs and priorities of the
university."

Authors include: James Luther, Committee Chairman Cynthia Hope
Duke University University of Alabama
James Barbret Terry Johnson
Wayne State University University of Iowa
Sara Bible Ron Maples
Stanford University University of Tennessee System
Mary Lee Brown Kim Moreland
University of Pennsylvania University of Wisconsin
Michael Daniels Ryan Rapp (Volunteer)
Northwestern University University of Missouri System
Kelvin Droegemeier John Shipley
University of Oklahoma University of Miami
Dan Evon Cathy Snyder
Michigan State University Vanderbilt University
Jill Ferguson (Volunteer and Editor) Eric Vermillion (Retired)
University of Missouri, Columbia University of California,
San Francisco

About 30% of research budget comes from institutional funding on average, since the grants don't cover all costs. A significant part of that likely comes from unrestricted funds (tuition, state appropriations). So again I dispute your claim that more research is necessarily better from an undergraduate education point of view.

https://www.cogr.edu/COGR/files/ccLibraryFiles/Filename/000000000267/Finances%20of%20Research%20Universities_June%202014.pdf

Simply untrue.

1. Federal funds may be required for research - which note that it includes research assistantships, facilities and supplies, etc. which would other wise come from the university's purse - but top researchers that are normally contracted to teach 3 classes a semester, for example, can set aside a portion of the research money they have won and give it to the university to "buy" their way out of teaching the 3rd class. In turn, the university then uses that money to hire another professor. In this manner, large research universities can maintain a huge number of faculty, each that may only teach 1 grad and 1 undergrad course a semester. This provides variety in the number of professors and the number of courses offered at the research university. A non-research university therefore generally has a smaller faculty in the various departments

2. Furthermore, research universities don't only get funding from the federal government, but also from industry and other organizations. These industry research funds can be used to heavily supplement the income of the professors researching on the project that the funding has been granted for. For example, a research university might pay maximum base salary of $250,000 for professors. However, if that professor's lab or research group then wins funding from industry, it can supplement the professor's income massively i.e. to $500,000 for the year. Essentially, the research university can attract professors that are way out of the university's budget - i.e. if they are a state university especially - because the professor's affiliation with the research university (and the facilities that the university provides) allows the professor to win huge research funds from industry/organizations. This way, a research university can attract far more 'expensive' professors to work at the university who would other wise not come due to the lower pay. Meanwhile a non-research university would have to flat out pay the $500,000/yr salary in order to attract the same caliber of professors to work there. Why do you think universities like Berkeley, UCLA, Michigan, Purdue, Georgia Tech, UIUC, etc. can be the top of the field in research and compete with the Ivies, despite being state universities with comparably small endowments? How can they attract professors who could be enticed by Ivy-level salaries? External industry research funding, which heavily skews towards medical, natural sciences and engineering.

[Anonymous]

Congrats! Great decision. She will be happy