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

Colleges and Universities A-Z University of California - Berkeley
101

<p>


</p>

<p>I'd say UCLA's regent benefits are quite a bit better than Cal's. Why is it that I've been hearing all these benefits from UCLA's regent benefits such as more scholarship money, more access to libraries, and more, while I hear Cal students complaining that they barely get any more money or perks? I'm sure they exist. And this is just an example. I said I don't know everything on this subject. Do I have to, in order to start a discussion about it?</p>

<p>


</p>

<p>First of all, I didn't say Cal is going down. I said I don't think it's improving as much as other UCs. I didn't say the regents were the only factor; far from it. I only used it as an example. My theory came from perception from the generally more knowledgable people (i.e. students or prospective students who know quite a bit about schools), which I think is based on something solid. Do I have cold hard facts? No. I never said I did. I just wanted to get some people's opinions and thoughts on this, I'm not writing a research paper on it. Does that really necessitate jumping down my throat?</p>

<p>
[quote]
As far as impersonal faculty, that hasn't been my experience. Maybe that's an old wives tale. Seeing as how UCLA has more students than Berkeley, I really don't see how they would get more personal attention, but I could be wrong.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>It doesn't make any sense to me either, as they are both large public schools. I've just heard so much about this "impersonal staff" at Berkeley and "more attention" at UCLA that I thought perhaps there is some truth to it. I think most people would agree with you that it's not that different.</p>

<p>


</p>

<p>Whatever criteria you'd like it to be. I just said something that's somewhat tangible and not what some guy walking down the street "thinks" about each school. Anything from professors, programs, staff, advising, campus resources, etc. which could contribute to undergrad quality. You can talk about any of these, and with any school. (again sorry for brining up UCLA so much it's just a good example)</p>

<p>
[quote]
Berkeley historically hasn’t wanted to create an honors system to create second-class students on the lower tier.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Do you know why this is? I think this would be better for the school as there are some people who are more passionate about getting a good education than others...</p>

<p>
[quote]
It seems like this is speculation, although I’m not quite sure what you’re saying. How do you know most of the Berkeley people who go elsewhere are choosing some of the elite private schools? I think many go to other UCs, for instance.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Well, for one 60% of admits choose to go somewhere else. Much of what I say is based on friends who have been admitted to Berkeley. If many go to other UCs, then UCSD's yield wouldn't be 22%, and UCD's wouldn't be around 17%. UCB is generally regarded as the top UC so it doesn't make sense that most are going to another UC. Certainly many do, but not most of the admits. And I know many who turn down UCB for another school and 9 out of 10 times it's for an elite private school. Some examples I know are Harvard, Cornell, U of C, Johns Hopkins, CalTech, etc. The 1 out of 10 times it's for UCLA. Like I have said before, much of what I say is based on speculation. Hey it's an online forum, gimme a break! :p</p>

102

<p>
[quote]
I really think it's because you're from northern California..... (that's why I said it's a regional thing)

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Hmm, I suppose that's a possibility. </p>

<p>
[quote]
This is absurd. Anderson is quite well known outside of California, if the recruiting there is any indication. Care to give your source otherwise?

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Corporate perceptions and public perceptions can be very different. I was discussing public perceptions at the time, though I tried checking up on corporate recruiting. The recruiting season is over, however, and most of the companies have dismantled their recruiting calenders. I'll take your word for it though.</p>

103

<p>
[quote]
Well, for one 60% of admits choose to go somewhere else. Much of what I say is based on friends who have been admitted to Berkeley. If many go to other UCs, then UCSD's yield wouldn't be 22%, and UCD's wouldn't be around 17%. UCB is generally regarded as the top UC so it doesn't make sense that most are going to another UC. Certainly many do, but not most of the admits. And I know many who turn down UCB for another school and 9 out of 10 times it's for an elite private school. Some examples I know are Harvard, Cornell, U of C, Johns Hopkins, CalTech, etc. The 1 out of 10 times it's for UCLA. Like I have said before, much of what I say is based on speculation. Hey it's an online forum, gimme a break!

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Well there are two types of applicants. One type uses UCLA and Cal as backup schools in case they don't get into a top 10 school. Other people aim for UCLA and Cal as their top choice. Whatever the reason, many people are left to choose UCLA and Cal because those are their dream schools or because they couldn't get into their dream private school. Those are the people who pick between UCLA and Cal and they are more common than you think ;)</p>

<p>UCSD's yield is 22% and UCD's yield is 17%, but UCLA's is ~40% as is Cal's. So the other UCs might not be a choice, but UCLA is also a choice in addition to the privates.</p>

104

<p>And what of type three, the type who gets their choice made for them (at my school and in my experience, overwhelmingly in at UCLA but not Berkeley, though I've known a few of the other types, and know more exist)? And what of type four, the one who gets rejected to each? And what of type five, those who do not apply to either or one?</p>

105

<p>
[quote]

[quote]
This is absurd. Anderson is quite well known outside of California, if the recruiting there is any indication. Care to give your source otherwise?

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Corporate perceptions and public perceptions can be very different. I was discussing public perceptions at the time, though I tried checking up on corporate recruiting. The recruiting season is over, however, and most of the companies have dismantled their recruiting calenders. I'll take your word for it though.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>I think (this is just speculation) that Haas is more well-known. But let's be honest, public perception? Most of the public probably hasn't heard of either.</p>

<p>
[quote]
Well there are two types of applicants. One type uses UCLA and Cal as backup schools in case they don't get into a top 10 school. Many people aim for UCLA and Cal and don't get in elsewhere or don't get into a private school they like. Those are the people who pick between UCLA and Cal and they are more common than you think

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Right and those are the people who choose a top private school over Cal because they were using Cal as a back-up. Then there are those who contemplate Cal and UCLA but from what I've seen those people aren't as common and most choose Cal and the rest go to UCLA...very few choose another UC over Cal. So in conclusion: Many who turn down Cal go to a top private school, while a good proportion of the rest go to UCLA, and the rest go to another UC, or another college. That's what I think anyway.</p>

<p>
[quote]
And what of type three, the type who gets their choice made for them (at my school and in my experience, overwhelmingly in at UCLA but not Berkeley, though I've known a few of the other types, and know more exist)? And what of type four, the one who gets rejected to each? And what of type five, those who do not apply to either or one?

[/quote]
</p>

<p>I think we were only talking about people who got into Berkeley and other schools of similar caliber?</p>

106

<p>
[quote]
Right and those are the people who choose a top private school over Cal because they were using Cal as a back-up. Then there are those who contemplate Cal and UCLA but from what I've seen those people aren't as common and most choose Cal and the rest go to UCLA...very few choose another UC over Cal.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Right, but 1/10 is a bit off. I would say the whole point of your argument is that UCLA is not a significant factor to Cal's yield rate? I disagree, I think if Cal and UCLA become one school and not two, the yield rate would be much higher.</p>

107

<p>Haha, sorry. I was just throwing a number out there. Actually from experience (from a small sample pool), maybe 10 people are accepted to UCLA and not Cal, 5 people accepted to Cal and not LA, and 5-10 people accepted to both. Out of those who are accepted to both and choose between the two usually 3/4 would choose Cal, or decide between Cal and another private school. But I agree that UCLA is a significant factor to Cal's yield rate.</p>

108

<p>Everyone, please join "I got into Berkeley but I chose UCLA instead OMG **WTFBBQ AWSOME SELF-ORGASM" facebook group**</p>

109

<p>Haha even those of you who didn't get in. Here we don't feel the need to create a "I got into UCLA but choose not to go" group for some reason. <em>shrug</em></p>

110

<p>The wonderful result that I expected this thread would eventually evolve into.</p>

<p>UCLA is a good school as well that for California kids with the choice between the two have the possibility of choosing. I say that and acknowledge that and depends on personal choice.</p>

<p>I'll give UCLA folks the benefit of the doubt and not judge them by 13351.</p>

111

<p>Yes..."awesome self-orgasm". Why don't you go do that 13351. </p>

<p>It's just as Drab said. We don't feel the need to create a "OMG I GOT INTO UCLA BUT I'M GOING TO CAL" group. For most, that decision was just...well, duh.</p>

<p>Two things that are critical to the continued success of a great university are the popular perspective, and the attitude of the students.</p>

<p>Popular persepctive. Fron a state view, the public views UCLA as a great school, and very respectable, similar to how they view Stanford and Berkeley. From a national perspective, the views begin to diverge. UC Berkeley is the Best public university, hands down, and is given a lot of respect for that because there are people who would prefer a public institution over a private one, and for that it's viewed very highly. UCLA is great as well, from a national perspective, but it's like Washington University in St. Louis (no offence to them); it's not very well known to the average American. From an international perspective, UCLA falls out of the race completely. Sure, people will know what it is because they'll know the University of California system, and they'll know the city Los Angeles, for as for the school, it's prestige just can't compete with Berkeley. Berkeley is World-Class. UCLA is just a great & respectable university.</p>

<p>Student Attitude. For this I'm going to speak from my own experiences and from what I see in my own high school. Seniors at my high school regard UCLA as some "fun" place to be in the next for years and this attitude greatly overshadows the desire for going to college to "succeed." Earlier on this year, most of the (now) Berkeley kids (myself included) at my school were aimed at going to UCLA, because like the typical senior in October, we were suffering from senioritis and the only cure seemed to be "extreme fun." All the way up to March 30, my mind was FIXED on going to UCLA for 4 years of fun-times (you know, the whole 'sun, surf, and sand' routine). But on March 30, at around 5 pm, I checked Berkeley's website and from the moment I saw "Congratulations," my mind was set. The glory of Berkeley had won me over. It was funny to see how UCLA went from recieving 30 students from my highschool, to 10 in the time span of a couple days. I guess for most people, they finally realized what was more important in life. The sun, surf and sand of Venice beach is great, but the fun can never last past the first couple months. I quote this from a girl in my school whose going to UCLA next year. "I'm going to UCLA cause the guys at Berkeley are so nerdy...I mean, I know I'm going to get laid in college, so I don't want it to be done by a bunch of nerds." For many (but not all) people, they choose Berkeley for the education. They choose UCLA for fun. Clearly, we know where these diverging attitudes will lead.</p>

<p>The prestige of Berkeley is overwhelming in relevance to that of UCLA's. When you visit Berkeley for the first time and see the Campanile, you feel like visting Princeton or Harvard (Holy ****! This place is a Castle!?!?! (although Berkeley isn't a castle)), you taste that college atmosphere in the air. On the other hand, Many people regard UCLA as "4 more years of high school."</p>

112

<p>twilightzer,</p>

<p>Just because a couple idiots at your school saw UCLA as "sun, surf, and sand" doesn't mean that it's a majority attitude. But what difference would it make, it's obvious to you that only the mentally inferior individual would choose UCLA anyway.</p>

<p>:rolleyes:</p>

113

<p>
[quote]
but it's like Washington University in St. Louis (no offence to them)

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Ouch!</p>

<p>That's a little bit harsh to UCLA. ;)</p>

<p>But twilightzer0 is right. Most people that I've talked to who are academically strong and got into both and chose UCLA are mostly aimed after fit more than seeing which is academically stronger. </p>

<p>Of course, there's nothing wrong with fit, but overall pure academics would favor Berkeley.</p>

<p>UCLA isn't that terribly far off though. It's at a level where "fit" is a perfectly justifiable reason to choose it. And unlike Washington University in St. Louis, it does have substance to back itself up.</p>

114

<p><em>sigh</em> UCLA's a great school and I still respect it...</p>

<p>please note how I used the word "many" and not "all" in my descriptions as there are still some wonderfully brilliant people at UCLA (like UCLAri (I'm assuming you went to UCLA here...)). And of course by no way am I claiming the "idiots" at my school reflect the "majority attitude" as I've Mentioned this was Only from my Own experiences.</p>

115

<p>Thank you Allorion for getting my name right!</p>

<p>You're like the first in the last dozen people or so (I'm not kidding...).</p>

116

<p>See, here's the problem guys...UNDERGRAD and GRAD are different anyway.</p>

<p>The difference between UCLA and Cal for undergrad are very very minor. Hell, just look at admit rates to top grad schools. They're almost identical. For undergrad, there's really no real huge gap.</p>

<p>For grad, in 90% of programs, there's a huge gap.</p>

<p>But until any one of you are in a PhD program, don't start wagging fingers.</p>

117

<p>twighlightzer0,</p>

<p>Get used to people dropping numbers off your name on forums.</p>

<p>Heck, most people drop the "ri" off my name.</p>

118

<p>Yeah, twilitzer0 over-generalized a little bit, but he has a good point. I know many people like that too. It's a sizable population. We still respect UCLA.</p>

<p>
[quote]
I'm going to UCLA cause the guys at Berkeley are so nerdy...I mean, I know I'm going to get laid in college, so I don't want it to be done by a bunch of nerds.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Best quote ever.</p>

119

<p>And I know people who went to Cal so they could be hippies and smoke weed everyday.</p>

<p>I'm not trumpeting it, though.</p>

120

<p>
[quote]
The difference between UCLA and Cal for undergrad are very very minor. Hell, just look at admit rates to top grad schools. They're almost identical. For undergrad, there's really no real huge gap.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Of course. No one said that going to UCLA is like you're taking a nosedive off a cliff or something academically.
I personally find it laudable for those who choose fit over prestige of a university in deciding where they want to spend their next four years.</p>

<p>And yes, the difference is minor between the two--especially in the honors college.</p>

<p>But generally, especially outside of UCLA's honors college, wouldn't you say that that minor edge generally favors Berkeley?</p>

<p>While it isn't enough if you hate Berkeley's atmosphere, I'd say that Berkeley programs are for the most part stronger than UCLA's, even if the difference is slight.</p>

<p>But that's for the sake of the discussion. I think for the most part, success rides more on the person rather than the school (yay Freakonomics). There will undoubtedly be successful people at UCLA, as a fair amount of the pool is as strong as Berkeley's and there would be no difference as to which one they actually went to.</p>

<p>
[quote]
twighlightzer0

[/quote]
</p>

<p>
[quote]
twilitzer0

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Not making fun of your spelling (UCLAri, I think vicissitudes might have done that deliberately), because I have spelled things wrong in haste as well.</p>

<p>I just got a kick out of reading those out loud. ;)</p>