<p>I was wondering how uc b is viewed in different part of regions . How is the univ viewed in specific regions in Asia and north America? Also how is the prestige compared to ucla and Michigan Ann arbour? Personally there is no wrong answer but just wanted to hear your opinion bc I live in an extremely small town :(</p>
<p>In some regions of Asia, especially China and Korea (Japan not so much), Berkeley is highly regarded as being on par with most Ivies and Stanford/MIT. I think it’s very well-known and highly regarded in India as well, but I’m not 100% sure about that since I have no direct experience with India.</p>
<p>In California, Berkeley is of course well known and is viewed as a top-university for certain majors (such as Business, Engineering, etc). But in America in general, I would say, Berkeley’s undergraduate education it is not seen as being on the same level as HYPSM.</p>
<p>Now, if we talk about graduate school then that’s a completely different story. Berkeley is one of the top, if not the best, graduate schools in the world, for many fields. Luckily that reputation sometimes spills over to undergraduate education ;)</p>
<p>Oh, also, comparing Berkeley’s prestige to UCLA I would say that Berkeley is in general much more prestigious worldwide, especially in the countries mentioned above (China, Korea). Admittedly, that’s probably an effect of Berkeley’s graduate rather than undergraduate programs, but most people won’t know or care about that.</p>
<p>In North America, where people seems to know more about US education, it probably depends on the major. In general I would describe Berkeley and UCLA as equally prestigious, but there are certain majors for which Berkeley is extremely well known (EECS, Business, etc) just like there are other majors UCLA is famous for (Theater, Communication, etc).</p>
<p>Growing up in the midwest, UCB was always regarded has one of the top universities, more so than most of the Ivy’s. UCLA was viewed as good, but not at the same level as UCB.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>In Asia, Berkeley is generally on its own plane, with Stanford, MIT, Harvard. Certain engineering-centric Asians prefer the former three. Asians in California often have a partiality to Berkeley and Stanford, simply because they think ‘world class and the best weather’. </p>
<p>All the same, obviously these aren’t the best ways to actually make decisions.</p>
<p>I completely agree with what everyone has said on here. Berkeley has an excellent prestige factor worldwide, especially for engineering. I think it is definitely seen as being better than both UCLA and Michigan worldwide. But also, besides engineering, Berkeley is very good in social studies and just about every other academic field. Just look at its subject rankings to see what I mean: [University</a> of california berkeley | Top Universities](<a href=“http://www.topuniversities.com/university/84/university-of-california--berkeley]University”>http://www.topuniversities.com/university/84/university-of-california--berkeley)</p>
<p>Jiao Tong University in China has been ranking worldwide universities for several years to see how Chinese universities can compete. Now that data is public. Things like US News rankings have to be taken with a pinch of salt as they have a bias on non-academic factors. </p>
<p>Check out [Academic</a> Ranking of World Universities (ARWU)](<a href=“http://www.arwu.org%5DAcademic”>http://www.arwu.org) for the Tong rankings. They explain how they rank worldwide universities on that site.</p>
<p>Savannah, Georgia here. When I got into UCLA, people told me it was very hard to get into and seemed impressed. After getting into Berkeley, people told me it was impossible to get into and gave me hugs. (Today at school actually, haha)</p>
<p>Personally I would put UCB and UCLA on the same level, but UCB gets the bump from people not so much in the know because of its killer grad school.</p>
<p>@ rr43: Actually my link isn’t from US news. I agree that US News can be biased, which is why I look at the worldwide ranking of top universities, and that’s the link I posted on here. </p>
<p>But on the world universities rankings table that you posted, why is UChicago above Oxford? I mean, Oxford is one of THE best universities in the world in so many ways, not to mention the fact that it has produced so many of the prime ministers and successful lawyers in the UK. And how on earth is UCSD better than Imperial College in the UK? It seems like this ranking list is rather biased towards the US…</p>
<p>Coming from India, both my paternal and maternal grandmother knew about Berkeley when I got admitted yesterday. That means a lot, trust me 
Basically, everyone here knows about it because somehow some relative went to Cal. They might not know about Yale(just to take an example), but Harvard, MIT, Stanford, Cal and Princeton are big names here.</p>
<p>For someone who wants to apply to medical school later, undergraduate UCLA is better than undergraduate Berkeley, right?</p>
<p>@refrigerator - I wasn’t referring to your post at all. I was just giving another ranking as reference, which seems to be more in line with academics. Also the OP was asking how UCB is viewed in specific regions like Asia. So thought that would be a good ref.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Are you aware that UChicago has the most Nobel Prizes in the world? Chicago’s 85 to Oxford’s 57. Are you aware that Chicago produced the first nuclear bomb? That it’s where the current US president spent 14 years of his life writing, researching, teaching, and raising a family? If you really think that Oxford is better at research than Chicago, which is what the world rankings measure, then you’re terribly uninformed.</p>
<p>^^ UChicago mathematics rocks…they produced David Eisenbud for one thing. </p>
<p>That said, I hate ranking systems that compare broadly, outside of something specific. And even these, I prefer only if they do a good job and take everything into account.</p>
<p>Chicago produced the first atomic bomb? Wow, wrong wrong wrong. Chicago was where Enrico Fermi produced the first nuclear chain reaction, the first reactor. The leadership for the bomb project was given to Robert Oppenheimer (of Cal) who took all key scientists off to his former Boys School in Los Alamos to design, test and build the bomb. Fermi and the others from Chicago headed out to Los Alamos. To this day, the Los Alamos lab (and the Lawrence Berkeley National Labs near us that also build bombs) are run by the UC on behalf of the US Government since many of the leaders of the bomb project were Cal staff. </p>
<p>Yes there were Nobel winners working on the project from Chicago, but also from Cornell (Hans Bethe) and Columbia Harold Urey) and other top universities, but once it was time to actually invent, test and build the bomb, that went to Los Alamos and plenty of Cal scientists leading teams. </p>
<p>The work to prove out a reactor at Chicago was important but just a sliver of all the innovation and effort in the Manhattan project. Better to say it was a national effort involving most of the top universities and scientists, but if you were going to pick one school most involved, it would be Cal and not Chicago. </p>
<p>Number of laureates, etc, no issues, just had to jump in on the historical inaccuracy.</p>
<p>Berkeley is famous in Japan, Singapore, the Philippines, HK, Taiwan, Thailand, Malaysia, Indonesia, Australia, Pakistan, Italy, Spain, United Kingdon and India. I have been to these countries at least more than just once.</p>
<p>
I think we had this topic before but, what do you mean by “famous”? For my definition of “famous”, I don’t really agree with some countries in your list and don’t know about the others.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>No, I’m not in the least bit uninformed because I didn’t say that Oxford was better at research than Chicago. I said that Oxford was a better university ** overall **. Of course Chicago is still an excellent university, but it can’t be denied that Oxford is better. As rider730 already explained, Chicago didn’t produced the first nuclear bomb. And Chicago may have slightly more Nobel Laureates than Oxford, but Oxford is the university that educated 25 of Britain’s prime ministers (how many presidents has Chicago educated?), countless monarchs, parliament members, lawyers, judges, etc. It also produced many famous poets and writers, and the list just goes on. Oxford also has the largest university press in the whole world. So I’m not saying that Chicago is a terrible university, because that’s obviously not true. I’m just saying that Oxford should be ranked higher in terms of its academic excellence. (And it is actually more highly ranked on the QS world universities table)</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Oh and excellence in research is actually not what world rankings measure. That’s actually only about 20% of the overall ranking score on the QS rankings list ([Methodology:</a> A simple overview | Top Universities](<a href=“http://www.topuniversities.com/university-rankings/world-university-rankings/methodology/simple-overview]Methodology:”>http://www.topuniversities.com/university-rankings/world-university-rankings/methodology/simple-overview)), and I presume it will be a similar amount for other reliable tables. Being 20% of the overall score clearly does not make it the major component. The peer review, employer review, faculty student ratio, all play a large role in the ranking. So it’s not just about which university has the best research.</p>
<p>Those rankings are terrible</p>