<p>
</p>
<p>OUCH!!! I think this a rather very condescending post.</p>
<p>Just how smart are the MIT students/alumni that they think so lowly of the Berkeley engineering students/alumni!!! </p>
<p>^ It was a statement of fact. How would you say it in a less condescending way? Or, if you do not believe it is factually correct, what evidence do you have?</p>
<p>So after looking around some it appears that the average GPA at Berkeley is actually similar to the average GPA at MIT although I suspect average STEM grades are still lower at Berkeley. I am also somewhat perplexed what you thought it was that condescending. Do you think actually think there is no significant difference between the average student at Berkeley and the average student at MIT (I never originally said anything about engineering)? I think Berkeley is an excellent school but I think the average quality of undergraduates there is not nearly high as at MIT.</p>
<p>I would admit that, in general, Berkeley students are weaker than MIT students. But much weaker??? Oh, come on! </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>That’s a rather poor argument, dear. I thought everyone at MIT is a genius!!! lol…
Those who made the claim must present the evidence first, not the other way around.
If I stole your money, will you have to let me prove to you first that I did not steal your money? lol… </p>
<p>I may just have a finer scale for differentiating abilities but if the median Berkeley student was instead at MIT how well do you think they would do? 20th percentile? SAT scores and general selectivity strongly suggest MIT students are stronger. I think it’s reasonable to assume that everyone is aware of these facts and that any claim of academic equivalence would need to be despite these facts. </p>
<p>@RML - I’m assuming some basis of common knowledge. For instance, MIT students have higher average incoming SAT scores (not only in math, but also in CR and writing) than UC Berkeley students. If you haven’t done the basic research to know this, here are some links:</p>
<p><a href=“Student Profile - Office of Undergraduate Admissions”>http://admissions.berkeley.edu/studentprofile</a>
<a href=“Admissions statistics | MIT Admissions”>http://mitadmissions.org/apply/process/stats</a></p>
<p>Those pages also show that a fifth of applicants at UC Berkeley get in. It’s not even a tenth of MIT applicants that get in. </p>
<p>You may argue that the numbers aren’t “much” higher – that is a subjective call. But I don’t think a disagreement there makes Mikalye’s comment condescending. </p>
<p>With that out of the way, are you going to provide anything besides ad hominem attacks and using diminutives? </p>
<p>Just to be clear it was my comment that RML was responding to not Mikalye’s.</p>
<p>First of all, this particular thread was about engineering, so it’s safe to assume that UMTYMP was talking about the engineering students at Berkeley. So, let’s all stick with that. </p>
<p>UMTYMP said, the Berkeley (engineering) students are much weaker than MIT students, in general. I said, I would have to agree that it’s weaker. What I do not agree with is when he said, “MUCH weaker”. </p>
<p>The admit rate of Berkeley is 17.3%. But the College of Engineering is only 9%. The general GPA of Berkeley students isn’t any different from MIT’s. The SAT average of Berkeley isn’t substantially lower than MIT’s, and the engineering students at Berkeley have always had a marginal SAT scores higher than the rest of the university’s. Whilst it is true that it is more difficult to get into MIT than Berkeley COE, the fact remains that those who aren’t admitted to MIT (and are now at Cal COE) aren’t automatically “much weaker” students. Maybe weaker students. But much weaker? Are you people in Cambridge gods? </p>
<p>
I think that’s more likely due to ignorance rather than fact. I’m sorry if I were a bit harsh. I felt you need to go back to reality instead of living in your own fanciful world. There is no question that you are a very smart person, Piper. But much smarter than most engineering students at Cal? I seriously doubt that. </p>
<p>Interestingly, two MIT seniors I know chose Berkeley for their graduate/phD program, one of them actually chose it over Harvard, Cornell, Columbia. Says something just about the grad program, I guess. </p>
<p>It’s not safe to assume that I was just talking about the engineering students at Berkeley. Even engineers take many non engineering classes and are thus affected by the general grading practices of a school. Again maybe I make finer-grained distinctions than you do but I would consider the SAT difference between MIT and Berkeley “substantial”. It’s also the case that basically no one who gets into Berkeley and HYPSM chooses Berkeley which I would consider pretty strong evidence that the latter have significantly stronger student bodies (the QJE Avery et al paper on revealed preferences, Parchment revealed preference rankings, leaked Stanford data uniformly support this). The Stanford cross-admit data is perhaps the cleanest of the three and it shows the extent that Stanford absolutely destroys Berkeley in getting cross-admits: 630 students were admitted to both Stanford and Berkeley for the class of 2014 and <14 choose Berkeley (<a href=“Mathacle's Blog: Stanford or Harvard/Yale/Princeton/MIT, or Others?”>http://mathacle.blogspot.com/2012/01/stanford-or-harvardyaleprincetonmit-or.html</a>). Both that data and the Avery paper as well as the Parchment data show MIT as a peer to Stanford in this regard if maybe a little weaker. At the undergrad level whether you think MIT students are stronger or much stronger seems to be a matter of semantics although I think there is a strong case that the difference is pretty large. Obviously at the grad level MIT and Berkeley are much more comparable and things very dramatically by department but there are many fields particularly in engineering where Berkeley is better at the graduate level than Harvard, Cornell, and Columbia. </p>
<p>@RML - You’ve said nothing of substance. You still haven’t clarified what you found condescending, and the only problem you cite - once you were criticized, not originally - is that you disagree with the subjective usage of “much”. </p>
<p>You may disagree that the difference of scores and other things cited don’t make “much” a difference - you too are allowed a subjective opinion. That doesn’t make anyone who disagrees with you condescending. </p>
<p>The original poster was talking about undergraduate programs, as was I, as was apparently UMTYMP student. You may want to reread the thread.</p>
<p>UMTYMP, are you saying that all students that MIT and Stanford rejects are “much weaker” students? Please clarify your point. Thank you.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Let me re post what I said why it is not right for you to say Berkeley engineering students are not much weaker than MIT students. Weaker, yes. But not much weaker.
</p>
<p>Again, let me ask you this. Are those students not admitted to MIT much weaker students? </p>
<p>@RML - Yes, I do find the different in scores as well as what is mentioned in UMTYMP student’s post to warrant the “much”. You may disagree, but you still don’t seem to understand that this is a subjective matter. You still have not clarified why disagreeing with you on a subjective matter makes someone condescending.</p>
<p>I don’t think all students that MIT and Stanford reject are “much weaker” as admissions does make mistakes and isn’t solely concerned with academic abilities. However, I have no problem believing that the average student rejected by MIT and Stanford is much weaker than the average student accepted by those schools (I don’t at all have a good idea of where the average applicant to MIT/Stanford actually ends up. My low confidence guess is the median applicant to these schools ends up at a school somewhat less selective than Berkeley). Additionally, the best students not admitted to MIT/Stanford will probably end up at schools in top the 10-15 range. I have some friends at Berkeley and my impression from talking with them is that very few students there would be in the top half of MIT academically. I also spent 2 years during high school taking upper division classes at the University of Minnesota (admittedly less selective than Berkeley) and virtually no students there were comparable to even the median student at MIT.</p>
<p>I suspect RML’s condescending contention is based on your refusal to ignore the objective facts placed before you that engineering students at Berkeley and MIT are statistically similar and insisting on continuing to apply subjective opinion (to which you are entitled) that Berkeley students are “much” weaker based on ‘desirability’ and personal observation. </p>
<p>I find it interesting the need to compare MIT to Stanford despite the fact that according to the dubious US News rankings, they are one notch lower (#2) than MIT in undergraduate engineering program - nevermind that Berkeley is rated #3. By your reasoning, does Stanford students merit only ‘lower’ rather than ‘much lower’ assessment based on this ranking? I shudder to think what you must think of Caltech students from the #4 ranked school. But I suspect Caltech students may have some condescending subjective opinions of MIT and the US News ranking as well. </p>
<p>From my observation, the top schools will always have truly exceptional students that go on to do great things. Other than them, there are very little differences. Judging by this criteria, MIT has 30 alumni go on to win the Nobel prize, while Berkeley has 29. I wonder how many Stanford has.</p>
<p>Berkeley SAT range (25%-75%) for admitted students and GPA range
University of California, Berkeley’s average SAT scores fall between:</p>
<p>Verbal: 600 and 730
Math: 630 and 760
Writing: 610 and 740</p>
<p>GPA 3.76 (25%) 3.92 (50%) 4.0 (75%)</p>
<hr>
<p>MIT SAT range
Verbal: 690 and 790
math: 750 and 800
writing: 700 and 790</p>
<p>This is for all students, not engineering school-specific. Also, it is for admitted students, not for ones that enrolled. </p>
<p>I see where @cadave is coming from…@UMTYMP said:
…to be frank and blunt, many of the Stanford/MIT rejects who tend to be the top CS/engineering students get accepted to P, Y, H, Cornell…along with UCBerkeley. I have seen many more choosing to attend Berkeley (especially top Californians/internationals) who got rejected from Stanford/MIT rather than attending a school not known for CS or engineering prowess (they’re not naive…and they know what they want)… </p>
<p>…and it’s usually those who are wishy-washy types who don’t really have the dedication to handle the rigors of engineering or CS who “really” want to become a “consultant” after college who may decide to go to those other schools…</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Please remind me what objective facts show them to “statistically similar”. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>In light of the revealed preferences rankings I posted previously it seems extremely unlikely that any non-trivial fraction of UC Berkeley engineering students had offers from HYP. If you have actual data that contradicts this I’d love to see it otherwise I give little evidentiary weight to your anecdotes. </p>