shoebox10

I agree, didn't even think of that. I somewhat have to disagree on the whole "same professors in a major" because I've had all different teachers and will seem to continue with that. However, you're likely to see a teacher or two more than once, and I actually stay in touch with a couple of my teachers from last semester, so it's not like you take a class and move on. Instead, you can create valuable relationships, in and out of class, that can help you with picking a concentration/research/job/etc, which I think is your point.
Also, relationships on a student base form early and stick it out through the years within a certain major it seems. I have a friend knew from high school in EE with me and so he and I showed up to Circuits (ECE203) last semester on the first day, and our teacher gave us a ridiculous problem. There was a kid sorta near us who basically said "I have no idea what to do, help me!" and the three of us are great friends, and we actually spent from 5pm last night to 4am this morning, then 9-5 basically together studying for two ECE tests today. Many other students formed their "groups" early on this year when people settled into their majors, and you really can't beat a study group where not only do you work greatly together, but you're friends and can take a breather every once in awhile.

I'd like to be supportive of this agreement. Frankly, I think it's a good thing for the College and that transition is probably a tad easier (for all you other e-schoolers: the college of arts and crafts has got to be easier! hah...not calling it that is rule #1 of being a tour guide, but it's still funny). I wish the GPA was a tad higher, and there was some amount of work applied to the application, but I just don't want to see only CC students fill an incoming transfer class. Sure, they've worked hard and maybe should have been at a 4-yr institute but just couldn't, but just because someone else had the opportunity to go to another top school shouldn't make them any lesser of an applicant. I know I fit into that group, since I came from VT's top e-school, but I had legitimate reasons to transfer, and I don't think I should be penalized because I chose a school I thought I could fit in, and didn't.
Thus, I'm worried that not only the College could possibly see its entire transfer class composed of CC agreements, but SEAS very well could too. I think it's unlikely for a few years for the College, and even more years for SEAS, but it's still something I don't believe in. Especially since there are applicants from other top schools who might be better prepared to handle SEAS, and they could be denied a spot.
So, I think that the agreement should have been a bit tighter in its selection. For one, the GPA should be higher. Most students who take a course or two at a VCCS get a full letter grade, or more, higher. While CC isn't easier, per say, I don't think anyone can deny that a 4-yr program like UVA's is on the same level when it comes to the workload and the amount of dedication it takes to survive, much less do well. Sure, plenty of CCers are smart, hard-working individuals. I still think the cut off should be at least a 3.6. At the same time, applicants in the range of 3.4-3.6 should be highly considered. Which brings me to my next point: for the College, and SEAS, I think there should be a set number/percentage of agreement-only spots. If there are more people who meet the agreement, then it goes by GPA, and if people are at the same exact GPA, go by credits or some other measure. This guarantees that a mix of applicants will still enter as a transfer class. While CC transfers often hail great stories, so do other transfers from 4-yr colleges. I don't think it's fair for them to be screwed over. Especially for a school like UVA. I don't think they're any more privileged, but a 3.4 from a CC getting in over a 3.9 from a top school (they existed last year on here!) is nuts.

This is getting long, but I'm so full of caffine that I had to let it all out. There's points I missed, but hopefully they'll come back to me after people either agree with me or chew me out. Cheers.
Conclusion: I'm all for CC agreements. Get your tax money's worth man, come to UVa where life is sweet. But the agreements right now are flawed. They could possibly fill an entire class with VCCS students with lesser stats than non-VCCS students, and plus, more 3.4ers could apply than they have room for. Then what are they going to do? Increase the class sizes substantially? Also, the SEAS agreement might be setting people up for disappointment when their 3.4 goes to a 2.4 here. Again, I'M NOT SAYING THIS APPLIES TO ALL! And some people who entered here first year/non-VCCS transfer screw off and have bad GPAs. That's not the point. The point is that in general, while the agreement is a great idea overall, the exact plan reduces spots for transfers outside of VCCS from transferring (even if they have a 4.0, if CCers fill the class, too bad), leaves little room for variety, and as far as SEAS goes, the reqs might not be enough for the average joe to make a smooth transition. I believe the SEAS agreement should have more rigorous requisites and should implement a plan to make sure CCers stay afloat, while making sure qualified students not from VCCS have a chance. UVa's engineering is very, very unique (thesis! woot! suck it Princeton, we're the other cool school to require it) and I know its qualities drew me here, so why limit the unique space to only certain people? There needs to be a healthy balance. And, transfer CCers to SEAS after their first year, they're life will be so much better in the e-school because it'll be easier to adjust and there's a longer period of time to get a good GPA (another point about the SEAS transfer: they have four semesters to get a 3.0...if they mess up once, it's incredibly hard to recover). Let the state foot the difference in the bills for a year since they're so gung hoe for this agreement.

That is all. Let the games begin.