<p>I have tons upon tons of reasons to support my claim that Berkeley is superior to CMC, but I’m not going to divert the topic of this thread. Make another one for that and I will indulge with you all.</p>
<p>I would refute RML’s argument but he’ll just bring about his delusional prestige garbage and ruin the lives of the people that read his ill-informed posts.</p>
<p>^ Of course, you would. You’re from CMC, right?</p>
<p>Try digging up how much CMC grads make and compare it to Berkeley’s. </p>
<p>Berkeley is also part of the Ivy Plus Society. It’s an unofficial group of America’s elite and famous academic institutions. </p>
<p>OP, I was in HK with my wife who’s a Berkeley alumna to attend a gathering. It’s an activity that top-class people from the upper echelon do from time to time. </p>
<p>Such thing does not exist anywhere outside of California for CMC groups.</p>
<p>kwu,</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Of course, I meant as a whole. </p>
<p>In general, people don’t think about a particular institution and dissect them into many parts when thinking of its prestige.</p>
<p>Oh RML, I dug up how much these crappy CMC grads you speak of make compared to grads from your “upper echelon” state school!</p>
<p>It appears that upon graduation, Claremont McKenna grads make 58,300.</p>
<p>Berkeley: 57,100</p>
<p>58300>57100</p>
<p>I applaud your brilliant argument!</p>
<p><em>sigh</em> yes, you are right, the mid career salary is higher for Berkeley. PERHAPS that has something to do with the fact that CMC is how old? 63! That’s right, the school is only 63 years old. Clearly the data is skewed as a result as CMC has gained a significant amount of prestige since its inception. </p>
<p>I could go into admissions statistics if you want…</p>
<p>But do you talk to hiring managers? In the US the ‘layman’ perception can be VERY different from employer and certainly grad schools admissions-- it can be based not just on grad school reputation instead of undergrad quality, but on football team success.</p>
<p>This will be different for hiring managers. Certain schools have stellar reputations in certain departments and US companies know. Maybe Japanese do or not know the elite american undergraduate colleges. I would hope they would know the vast difference in going to UCB as undergrad vs. UCB as a grad student, but maybe not? CMC has a couple departments that are top in the U.S. and the undergrad education is tops.</p>
<p>“This will be different for hiring managers. Certain schools have stellar reputations in certain departments and US companies know. Maybe Japanese do or not know the elite american undergraduate colleges. I would hope they would know the vast difference in going to UCB as undergrad vs. UCB as a grad student, but maybe not?”</p>
<p>That was the whole point of this thread. They obviously don’t, and the OP needs to take that into consideration. UCB>the vast majority of the smaller and private schools of this country in Japan. The global business world, for the, most part, is much more impressed with a “world class” research university than some small, albeit excellent, domestic college.</p>
<p>Can CMC hold on its own against UC Berkeley in Asia? The answer would be a clear, no. </p>
<p>CMC is a respectable LAC. In California, it is considered one of the top LACs. Personally, I have no doubts that CMC is a good school. But much its prestige revolves only around California. When you go outside of California, the CMC name and network dwindles significantly. Whereas Berkeley’s prestige resonates and balloons and grow exponentially outside of California. It may not be the best school for everyone, in terms of “fit”, as not everyone would thrive under Berkeley’s milieu, but no one will argue that it is a prestigious school and is way more prestigious than CMC especially in Asia, where the OP was more concerned about since s/he will be working there. I would even go far and say that in Asia, UC Berkeley is more prestigious than Princeton, albeit only slightly. If that’s largely due to Berkeley’s top-notched grad and professional schools, maybe. But the point is, Berkeley is famous in Asia. Such thing can’t be said for CMC. I’m sorry if I was frank, but I guess some Americans should know that what they think are prestigious in America aren’t always and necessarily the same outside of America.</p>
<p>Firstly, you completely ignored my argument regarding the age of the school. Complete the same survey 20 years down the road, I think you will find a higher 10 year salary than the survey currently presents. Extrapolate current data to 2019, 10 years after the starting salary has been recorded as 58,300, I guarantee you will find different results.</p>
<p>Secondly, I don’t care about your “Ivy League Plus” thing. The University of Virginia is on that list too. I’m pretty sure if I were to e-mail them after I graduate, they would accept me as a CMC alum. </p>
<p>I DO accept that UC-Berkeley has greater prestige in Asia on the basis of its graduate programs. The only reason I post here is that I am SICK of seeing your deriding mindless posts regarding CMC. Your arguments are completely fallacious and are solely based on your deranged conception of prestige being an accurate indicator of a school’s academics.</p>
<p>CMC is SIXTY THREE. It has a student body of approximately 1200. How on earth can one expect it to have equal global prestige? I will NOT argue with you in terms of prestige in Asia, but I WILL argue with you when it comes to you holding CMC’s academics as below those of Berkeley.</p>
<p>Congratulations! Your Berkeley alumni can afford to hold a prom! My underfunded high school could afford to hold a prom so give me a break. Your commentary regarding CMC’s quality had absolutely nothing to do with Asia and as a result, you can expect criticism of such.</p>
<p>However, in regards to Asia, CMC will be funding a trip for me, and 7 other students to attend World Model United Nations in Taipei. The director of alumni relations will be arranging for us to meet with some CMC alum in Taipei. I imagine it will be of high quality, as is everything else affiliated with CMC.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Oh-oh… Be mindful with your haughtiness (and arrogance), my friend. My friend who graduated from Cambridge (economics) and Harvard (government) were rejected from Darden outright-ly. Take note, Cambridge and Harvard - two of the world’s most famous universities. What makes you sure that a CMC degree would be a sure ticket to UVa? lol</p>
<p>
That Berkeley is prestigious in Asia than CMC due to Berkeley’s renown grad school is just a bonus to Berkeley. But before anything, show me that Berkeley is prestigious in ASIA only for postgrad. </p>
<p>
I never said CMC is not a good school. I just said that in my world, and in ASIA where the OP happens to be from, CMC is not prestigious.</p>
<p>To the original poster- I can sympathize…I grew up in a mostly Asian community where prestige was a high factor. I’m going to apply to top schools off the US News Rankings, basically. Strangely enough, my dream school USED to be UC Berkeley (I’m in good old soCAL) but starting in high school and learning more about my dad’s experiences as a doctor, my dream has been to attend Washington University in St. Louis (the 12th best school in the nation). The good news is that it’s ranked higher than Berkeley, so not like anyone is going to question me about it. Still, it’s strange that life has to be about prestige, and like I said, growing up in an Asian community can be stressful. I hope you work out these issues, and know you’re not alone =)</p>
<p>btw, RML, you sound hoity-toity yourself!</p>
<p>"Berkeley vs CMC is a bad example. Because not only is Berkeley way more prestigious than CMC is, it also is the better academic institution, bar none. Remember that Berkeley is world-class and FAMOUS. It employs the best faculty members you can find anywhere on earth. It has also an amazing academic facility that is rivaled only by HYPSM. Berkeley grads are scattered all over the world, are paid more, earn more, and they enjoy living in the higher social and economic strata, not only in America but anywhere in the world. Many Berkeley grads hold high posts in government and large, multi-national companies. Etc. Etc. Such things can’t be said to CMC, but CMC is also a good school. though not quite up to par to Berkeley’s status and fame.</p>
<p>Maybe the best example would be Berkeley vs Williams or Berkeley vs Amherst. "</p>
<p>Your claim for Berkeley being a better institution has nothing to do with Asia.</p>
<p>UVA is an oustanding school, and Darden is a graduate program, not the undergraduate college. I don’t care if they graduated from Cambridge or Harvard (obviously elite schools), you never disclosed what their GPAs were or where they worked after their undergrad, or their leadership qualities/potential, or their GMAT scores…</p>
<p>And it’s quite ironic that you call me arrogant given your previous statements. I’m not arrogant. I don’t ride the names of my family’s schools to advance my position in life. I’m quite okay with CMC being a lesser known institution around the world, but I have great pride for the school itself and its academics.</p>
<p>“OP, I was in HK with my wife who’s a Berkeley alumna to attend a gathering. It’s an activity that top-class people from the upper echelon do from time to time.”</p>
<p>Nice…</p>
<p>Furthermore, I think it can be considered general consensus that much of Berkeley’s prestige as an institution is derived from the success of its graduate programs. Though still good, if Berkeley did not have any graduate programs, would it still be considered as prestigious?</p>
<p>muchoschocolate: I was strongly considering WUSTL for transfer admission but ultimately decided on CMC. WUSTL is an outstanding school but there is a lot of hate for it on these boards (completely undeserved hate I may add). Berkeley people especially are known for criticizing WUSTL and claiming it’s “overranked” and that they “game their admissions.”</p>
<p>Ignore such commentary and pursue your dream as WashU is an outstanding place.</p>
<p>Again, we are not talking about stupid people on the street. We are trying to have a conversation about people who know better.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>It’s a Meet Market for workaholic social climbers. Best to have a few drinks before you let on you went to a state university. For undergrad I mean. If it was Boalt law school, start dropping the name as soon as you hang up your coat.</p>
<p>Hi THEAjay89!</p>
<p>I applaud your response to whoever wrote: “OP, I was in HK with my wife who’s a Berkeley alumna to attend a gathering. It’s an activity that top-class people from the upper echelon do from time to time.”
Whoever wrote that had a great sense of elitism, blech…</p>
<p>You sound like a mature individual who’s secure and confident about him/herself…and that is one success not all ppl have in life. I mean, take that professor Harvard PhD who shot her faculty members after they decnied her tenure. What’s prestige got to do with life know-how, right? </p>
<p>I love Washington University! It’s an elite school without the elitism and yes, sometimes ppl get bitter when their schools get outranked. Just like Dr. Bishop got bitter when she lost her feeling of entitlement.</p>
<p>
William and Mary is more than 250 years old. What’s your point?</p>
<p>
So, the statement that Berkeley is way more prestigious in Asia than CMC is a statement that you also believe to be true, as well. Thank you for confirming that. </p>
<p>
CMC cannot compete with Berkeley for the simple reason that Berkeley is a large research university. As such, Berkeley is well endowed with great, state-of-the-art facilities that cannot be found anywhere else outside of its peer schools. It has the conglomerate of the best scholars. The best and the brightest people converge in Berkeley. Can we say that same thing for CMC? NO! Does CMC have facilities that Berkeley has? no. And whether that’s due to its size is beside the point. The point is, Berkeley is prestigious and CMC is not. I don’t care how Berkeley got there and how CMC didn’t get there or why CMC would never get there. </p>
<p>
It wasn’t a prom. It was a thing that successful, affluent people, do in Asia. Aside from Berkeley, only Harvard, Yale, Stanford, Northwestern, Chicago, Columbia, Penn, Duke and Oxbridge that do the same thing. That gathering has made more than $200k for Berkeley. Can your prom raise half of that amount? lol</p>
<p>I never said CMC was more prestigious. I was referring to the academics and the clear sense of superiority you hold for UCB’s academics.</p>
<p>“CMC cannot compete with Berkeley for the simple reason that Berkeley is a large research university. As such, Berkeley is well endowed with great, state-of-the-art facilities that cannot be found anywhere else outside of its peer schools. It has the conglomerate of the best scholars. The best and the brightest people converge in Berkeley. Can we say that same thing for CMC? NO! Does CMC have facilities that Berkeley has? no. And whether that’s due to its size is beside the point. The point is, Berkeley is prestigious and CMC is not. I don’t care how Berkeley got there and how CMC didn’t get there or why CMC would never get there.”</p>
<p>Yes, you have renowned faculty. How does that extrapolate at all to undergraduate teaching? How does that reflect even “academics”. What difference does it make if you are in a class of 500 people who your professor is? Who CARES if you have renowned researchers. Is Akerloff or Romer really going to publish with an undergraduate? Doubtful. I don’t know what facilities you are talking about…If these facilities are so magnificent, I highly doubt undergraduates would have access to them. I really could care less as an undergraduate if Berkeley is “where the brightest people converge.” Are all the radical leftist students on campus part of this convergence?</p>
<p>Okay congratulations, an event made 200K for Berkeley. Your school’s financial statements are still as red as the absurd amount of Marxists on campus…</p>
<p>Furthermore, do you really consider HPY to be peers of Berkeley at the undergraduate level?</p>
<p>You seem to relate academic quality directly with prestige. That is a very large gap in logic…</p>
<p>Thanks muchoscholate!</p>
<p>It was RML that wrote that by the way.</p>
<p>People can do well regardless of their institution if they have the talent. Whether it’s WashU, CMC, UCB, wherever, it doesn’t matter. </p>
<p>In terms of career, if you really are THAT good, you will find a way to make things work and shouldn’t need a school’s name, or Ivy League Plus to succeed.</p>
<p>@RML: Yea I agree with THEAJay89… “prestige” is a social construct…and what do you know, it doesn’t necessarily correlate with undergraduate teaching quality.</p>
<p>I’m not sure where you’re getting information about Berkeley’s prestige, job placements, its “affluent” image…but I assure you as a CA resident with a bunch of older classmates at UC Berkeley, the undergraduate is not that spiffy. Don’t know about graduate school, but undergraduate is not that great. Large classrooms, less teacher-student interaction. Research opportunities may abound on the grad level, but not so on the undergrad level. And coming from a medical family…Berkeley’s medical school placement is not that great. Compare a 3.9 GPA undergrad from Berkeley with a 3.5 GPA undergrad from Washington University in St. Louis for example…the 3.9 from Berkeley may not get into any medical school, while WUSTL undergrad has a 90+% chance of getting into at least one (this is statistically shown). Incidentally, WUSTL is ranked higher than Berkeley, but that’s not the point. The point is that Berkeley may have its reasons for fame, but that does not correlate with undergraduate quality or overall quality, or even graduate school/medical school/ job placement for that matter. By this logic, any school like CMC could give you a run for your money. </p>
<p>Discuss, for example, fields of study, rather than proffer amorphous terms like “prestige,” “great, state-of-art,” (btw, it’s not like other universities are run-down…ie. if you got a lab, my friend, it’s not going to be stocked different from one school to the next) , “best and brightest” (how is this measured anyways?" Many of the terms you use are unscientific, immeasurable, unquantifiable terms and of no use in a debate.</p>