A discussion about the reputation of Berkeley as the top UC school

<p>
[quote]
I definitely think age plays a huge role UCLAri, but it's not solely it.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Sorry, I didn't mean to imply that it was the sole or even strongest factor. What a university does with its time matters as well. So do other factors like location. I can't help but wonder if UCI has benefitted from the development of Orange County, while UCR has suffered from the Inland Empire's relatively slower development. </p>

<p>
[quote]
And perhaps the alternative is true, maybe UCLA does have a bigger name in So Cal than Berkeley, but I don't think it does. <em>shrug</em> Perhaps.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>No, I still think that people look at Cal as the flagship of the UC system, even in So Cal.</p>

<p>Very well said UCLAri...</p>

<p>
[quote]
They will never discover 16 elements for the periodic table. They will never contribute to the Manhattan project that turned out the first nuclear bombs. They will never have Laurance Lab. They will never have two elements named after it. They will never become the research GIANT that Berkeley is. They will never have the international perstige that Berkeley has.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>This is what I'm worried about. Berkeley has a history of being a very strong university but that doesn't speak about the quality of the university NOW. I'm wondering if Berkeley is trying to improve itself as a school like the other UCs or simply relying on its past accomplishments and its prestige.</p>

<p>UCLAri, very good post!</p>

<p>
[quote]
maybe UCLA does have a bigger name in So Cal than Berkeley

[/quote]
</p>

<p>In terms of academic quality, I don't believe that people think UCLA is better than Cal. Berkeley is the 1st UC and everyone knows that, but a lot of people in socal view them pretty similar in terms of prestige.</p>

<p>
[quote]
I'm wondering if Berkeley is trying to improve itself as a school like the other UCs

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Well, I think at a certain point the law of diminishing return kicks in. It gets harder and harder to improve. You see schools like USC peaking off. In the top 25, there has been little shuffles but most schools have stayed put in recent years.</p>

<p>
[quote]
This is what I'm worried about. Berkeley has a history of being a very strong university but that doesn't speak about the quality of the university NOW. I'm wondering if Berkeley is trying to improve itself as a school like the other UCs or simply relying on its past accomplishments and its prestige.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>I think that if we are to believe USNews (let's suspend disbelief for say...this post) then Cal is still clearly a very very very powerful research center. Almost ever department is top 10, with a significant number in the top 5. 125 members of the National Academy of Sciences, 169 in the Academy of Arts and Scienes, and 8 living Nobelists. Only UCSD matches that number of Nobelists (with 8 as well), and it would take UCLA and UCSD combined to equal Cal's numbers in Academy memberships. </p>

<p>Clearly, Cal is still a research powerhouse.</p>

<p>Well yes, but I'm mostly concerned about the undergrad education, which seems to have improved little over the years. I don't think Cal can be surpassed in research or graduate programs by another UC anytime soon.</p>

<p>
[quote]
Well, I think at a certain point the law of diminishing return kicks in. It gets harder and harder to improve. You see schools like USC peaking off. In the top 25, there has been little shuffles but most schools have stayed put in recent years.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>The problem with going up in the top 25 is the fact that you start fighting for spots with privates (shut up, pervs), which in many cases have a much better undergraduate focus. </p>

<p>Let's be honest here guys...UCs don't exactly cater to undergrads, despite their hemming and hawwing otherwise.</p>

<p>
[quote]
Well yes, but I'm mostly concerned about the undergrad education, which seems to have improved little over the years. I don't think Cal can be surpassed in research or graduate programs by another UC anytime soon.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Well, that comes down, in part, to quality of faculty. But yes, there is also the undergrad factor, as sakky so often points out.</p>

<p>As far as that's concerned, I think that Cal is still the strongest program, but the other UCs seem to be pulling better than they used to. For most things graduate, you'd be nuts to go to UCLA over Cal. For undergrad, the difference is less pronounced.</p>

<p>why is UCSD able to admit 20 k people while berkeley only admits about 10 k people? Is it because UCSD is bigger?</p>

<p>Where are those numbers from? </p>

<p>Anyway, if it's true, then I'd say yield. Cal has much better yields every year.</p>

<p>
[quote]
Well, I think at a certain point the law of diminishing return kicks in. It gets harder and harder to improve. You see schools like USC peaking off. In the top 25, there has been little shuffles but most schools have stayed put in recent years.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>That actually sounds plausible. However, didn't someone say that in 1991 Berkeley was ranked #13 with U Penn? So what happened?
(well I guess you could say change in methodology)</p>

<p>Since the other UCs are trying to catch up in terms of research, grad programs / professional schools, etc., maybe Berkeley can work on its weakness which is the undergrad. which in turn might inspire other UCs in the future to improve their undergrad, like how the top-notch research and grad programs are inspiring other UCs to improve in those areas. Isn't that what a flagship campus does?</p>

<p>(another gripe I have is about the non-exsistent 24/7 libraries which I also think the UCs could work on although that's for another thread)</p>

<p>
[quote]
why is UCSD able to admit 20 k people while berkeley only admits about 10 k people? Is it because UCSD is bigger?

[/quote]
</p>

<p>I'd guess because UCSD is bigger. The campus is massive and they're still building some new buildings. Cal is pretty much all developed out land-wise.</p>

<p>The yield at UCSD is in the 22-23% range.</p>

<p>
[quote]
maybe UCLA does have a bigger name in So Cal than Berkeley

[/quote]
</p>

<p>In terms of academic quality, I don't believe that people think UCLA is better than Cal. Berkeley is the 1st UC and everyone knows that, but a lot of people in socal view them pretty similar in terms of prestige. I haven't been keeping up but my guess is that UCLA is on the news a lot more than Berkeley in Socal? Different factors contribute to this prestige</p>

<p>-UCLA is as selective as Cal to get in now
-UCLA's Medical Center is the Best in the West for 16 consecutive years
-UCLA Anderson is the best business school in Southern California. It is ranked top 10. The very popular alternative full time MBA is actually ranked 4th, the best in California
-UCLA has the best law school in Southern California
-UCLA's athletics program (notably Bruin Basketball and the 98 NCAA titles)</p>

<p>
[quote]
why is UCSD able to admit 20 k people while berkeley only admits about 10 k people? Is it because UCSD is bigger?

[/quote]
</p>

<p>I am not sure about size, but Cal's yield rate is ~40% and UCSD's yield rate is ~20%. Therefore, UCSD has to account for more people who will not attend UCSD; they will have to accept more to fill the slots.</p>

<p><a href="well%20I%20guess%20you%20could%20say%20change%20in%20methodology">quote</a>

[/quote]
</p>

<p>That sums it up, basically.</p>

<p>dyip,</p>

<p>There's also the fact that UCLA has improved its academics quite a bit over the past two decades or so.</p>

<p>O definitely, that's probably why more people are applying to UCLA and the student bodies are pretty similar now.</p>

<p>
[quote]
Berkeley has a history of being a very strong university but that doesn't speak about the quality of the university NOW.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Can't the same be said for any place? What do you mean, exactly?</p>

<p>
[quote]
why is UCSD able to admit 20 k people while berkeley only admits about 10 k people? Is it because UCSD is bigger?

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Yield and size, I think.</p>

<p>I think UCLA's getting more apps is in part because of academic improvements, but primarily from other factors.</p>

<p>The library 24/7 thing has to do with the UC libraries are open to the public, which makes the campuses open to the public. When I was on my UCLA tour the student guide said all the libraries aren't open because of this and student safety issues. I don't remember about CAL, but I thought the main library at UCLA is open late or even 24/7.</p>

<p>Powell's open pretty late during the quarter, and then really really late or even 24/7 before finals.</p>