Tell me about UNC

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It's competitive from out of state, but no more so than Auburn and Clemson are these days.

Best laugh I have had all week.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:NP It’s insufferable because that is why everyone taunts and makes fun of UVA, they act pompous. It’s a fine school, but it’s no ain’t or Ivy Plus. It’s embarrassing for a public school to be so arrogant.

I don’t have a kid at uva nor did a kid of mine apply to uva…but as a fcps family…it isn’t made up that uva’s in state students have high stats overall (save for maybe rural ones) AND UNC CH is not as hard to get into, in state.

The average SAT score at UNC is the same as UVA.

I prefer UNC to UVA, and have no doubt the in-state UNC students are as sharp as the UVA in-staters, but I must point out how unhelpful references to SAT scores are in these threads.

First, all references to test scores should be suspended until the effects of the test-optional phase have passed.

But more importantly, people in all sorts of discussions mention SAT and ACT scores, but nobody clarifies whether they are referring to the scores of applicants, the scores of those accepted, or those who attend. In THIS discussion, it would seem that the only one that is relevant is the scores of those who attend. In discussions focused on admissions, then the scores of applicants and those accepted would usually be more relevant. The fact that people never make a distinction among these 3 sets of data might indicate the posters aren't serious.

[Anonymous]

If there is any chance their interests may lead to them staying in research triangle, the alumni network is strong and Carolina is king. Fun to be able to go back and have the sports rivalries.

[Anonymous]

After graduation most likely working for a Duke grad.

[Anonymous]

UMD full ride vs UNC oos for biology degree.

Is UNC worth it?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:UMD full ride vs UNC oos for biology degree.

Is UNC worth it?

You already started a thread on this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Chapel Hill only admits 15% from OOS by state law. Most of the kids from our large DMV public that get in are straight A, 5+ APs, ECs, etc. VERY competitive.

If your kid can get it, its a fantastic school and environment.

It is less than that and includes athletes. Good luck getting in.

[Anonymous]

UVA is better choice

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:UVA is better choice

Couldn’t resist? Thread was tell me about UNC, not UNC versus UVA.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Kind of like University of Tennessee: not too difficult to get accepted from in state, but brutally competitive for OOSers.

Absolutely not true, not sure why UNC is so misunderstood. It is a very tough admit for Research Triangle and Charlotte students. Many more than qualified will not get in.

Agree (live in Raleigh); basically need to have perfect starts—these kids are/would be competitive for T10 but most elect to stay. It’s the top 5% of most high schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:NP It’s insufferable because that is why everyone taunts and makes fun of UVA, they act pompous. It’s a fine school, but it’s no ain’t or Ivy Plus. It’s embarrassing for a public school to be so arrogant.

I don’t have a kid at uva nor did a kid of mine apply to uva…but as a fcps family…it isn’t made up that uva’s in state students have high stats overall (save for maybe rural ones) AND UNC CH is not as hard to get into, in state.

The average SAT score at UNC is the same as UVA.

I prefer UNC to UVA, and have no doubt the in-state UNC students are as sharp as the UVA in-staters, but I must point out how unhelpful references to SAT scores are in these threads.

First, all references to test scores should be suspended until the effects of the test-optional phase have passed.

But more importantly, people in all sorts of discussions mention SAT and ACT scores, but nobody clarifies whether they are referring to the scores of applicants, the scores of those accepted, or those who attend. In THIS discussion, it would seem that the only one that is relevant is the scores of those who attend. In discussions focused on admissions, then the scores of applicants and those accepted would usually be more relevant. The fact that people never make a distinction among these 3 sets of data might indicate the posters aren't serious.

Everyone in the comments you are responding to are talking about students at the school, so it’s pretty clear this is about students who attend.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It's competitive from out of state, but no more so than Auburn and Clemson are these days.

Yeah no.

[Anonymous]

If you have decent scores it's relatively easy to get into if you are in state. OOS not so much (it's normally has an over 40% acceptance rate in state). Because of the OOS cap it makes the school seem more competitive than it is just looking at overall acceptance rate. Nothing spectacular about any of their programs and not great for STEM.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's competitive from out of state, but no more so than Auburn and Clemson are these days.

Yeah no.

+1 The Clemson booster is getting owned lol

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If you have decent scores it's relatively easy to get into if you are in state. OOS not so much (it's normally has an over 40% acceptance rate in state). Because of the OOS cap it makes the school seem more competitive than it is just looking at overall acceptance rate. Nothing spectacular about any of their programs and not great for STEM.

Sure.