Berkeley vs. Cornell for Pre-med Re-visited

Colleges and Universities A-Z University of California - Berkeley
1

<p>Norcalguy said:</p>

<p>"1. Berkeley data is incomplete.
2. It's hard for any public school to compete with elite privates in med school acceptances.
3. Lower quality of study body
4. Interesting that none of the students on the senior panel were going to med school immediately following undergrad (I actually attended a similar panel at Cornell this Wed. All but one were going to med school after undergrad. I was more interested in the one senior taking a year off since that's what I'm planning to do)
5. And please stop accusing schools of screening their applicants just because they have a higher acceptance rate than Berkeley lol "</p>

<p>1) Berkeley data is incomplete......yeah, so why are you drawing conclusions from it?? According to a UCSF med representative who was answering questions last year, last year was Berkeley students' best year in terms of admissions to UCSF med.....over 25 students (20% of the entering medical class) were Berkeley alumni....many took time off before applying. You won't find this info in the data set you were looking at but this came from a UCSF med school rep. Hmmmmm. So apparently, many Berkeley students don't report their acceptances/plans to Berkeley. Understandable, as Berkeley allows its students to apply independently of the school.</p>

<p>2) It's hard for any public school to compete with elite privates in med school acceptances? Apparently not. <a href="http://mstp.stanford.edu/students.html%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://mstp.stanford.edu/students.html&lt;/a>
Here is the list of MD/PhD students at Stanford...I count 4 Berkeley alumni and only 2 Cornellians....and 2 each from U of Arizona and Oregon State, as a matter of fact. Either you're wrong or Cornell isn't as "elite" as you hoped it to be, clown. Okay, now this will REALLY make you cry: <a href="http://medschool.ucsf.edu/mstp/students/%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://medschool.ucsf.edu/mstp/students/&lt;/a> . Here is the list of MD/PhD students at UCSF. I count NINE BERKELEY ALUMNI AND ZERO CORNELL ALUMNI. So where are the Cornellians?...I'll be fair by mentioning the stats for the MD/PhD program where Cornellians are most likely to be found: <a href="http://www.med.cornell.edu/mdphd/students/%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.med.cornell.edu/mdphd/students/&lt;/a> . I count 13 Cornellians and 4 Berkeley students. Hmmmm, I guess Cornell wins as expected......but then again, why would the Berkeley students do their MD/PhD if they got into UCSF's MD/PhD (UCSF is ranked 4th for research/medicine ....Cornell is 15th........and UCSF is ranked higher in terms of graduate education in the biological sciences than Cornell is). Also, I tried to find the stats for Harvard and Yale's MD/PhD programs but I couldn't find them......I could go on and on but I think I made my point: Cornell doesn't have an edge over Berkeley.</p>

<p>3) Lower quality of study body? Where did you pull this one out of??? Actually, I don't want to know. Let's look at 3 factors: Students who were in the top 10% of their HS class, US news academic reputation, and SATs.....</p>

<p>Top 10%: Berkeley wins according to US News, BUT I'm going to say it's a draw because there are more public school students entering Berkeley than there are entering Cornell.</p>

<p>US News academic reputation, based on surveys sent to various faculty and employers: Berkeley floats between 4.7 and 4.8....Cornell is usually at 4.7 in the last few years. So I'm going to say it's a draw.</p>

<p>SAT: Berkeley only considers the highest one-sitting composite score while Cornell adds the highest individual scores together to come up with a composite SAT score. You should know this, you applied to Berkeley and Cornell.....and so did I, and you know what....the SAT score that I got to report to Cornell was 30 points higher than the SAT score that I had to report to Berkeley. I know some people who have differences that are close to 100 points. If you factor this in, Berkeley students and Cornell students have similar SAT scores. SO it's a draw.</p>

<p>NOW, you try to convince me that Cornell has a higher quality student body. I know one guy from Berkeley who transferred to Cornell, and I know one guy from Cornell who transferred to Berkeley.....and you know what? Both say that Cornell students are pretty much East Coast mirror images of Berkeley students. The Cornell-alumni grad students at Berkeley that i've talked to say the same thing. I know how you feel.....you pay private school tuition so you like to delude yourself that you're somehow getting a better education at Cornell b/c come on, it's an Ivy right? The Ivy League is a sports conference to rational people....get over it.</p>

<p>4) And what does this have to do with anything??? Obviously you already know that many many Berkeley seniors go to med school immediately after graduation so what is your point? Two weeks ago I was talking to 2 Berkeley alumni whom I met through a club at Berkeley......I was asking them for advice about medical school because one is now on the faculty of Stanford med and the other is on the faculty of UCSF med. What now??? The panels you've attended are garbage compared to what I've experienced.</p>

<p>5) Yeah, that's real funny. I promise, I won't.....cause I don't have to. Look at the above points and cry.....and don't forget the key point I made in another reply about Berkeley being a California public school and Cornell being a private school....and the disadvantage that brings as California residents (which most Berkeley students are) can only apply to the super-competitive UCs as their state medical schools while most Cornellians (the non-Californians) have the advantage of applying to their not-so-selective state schools (like U of Kentucky, Ohio State, etc).</p>

<p>And as one last testament to your ignorance, here is a list someone presented showing the schools with the largest number of medical applicants. Notice how Berkeley is number 2 with >500 applicants: <a href="http://talk.collegeconfidential.com...ad.php?t=152312%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://talk.collegeconfidential.com...ad.php?t=152312&lt;/a>
By now I bet you feel stupid for suggesting that Cornell with its 220 med school applicants has more med school applicants than Berkeley.</p>

<p>I'm through talking to you, norcalguy....cause believe it or not, I feel kinda bad when I give someone a one-way bi*ch slap and they still hang onto pathetic inklings of myth...like a turd that won't flush, I know you'll come back again and again to try to argue with me. You can't. So don't expect a reply.</p>

<p>Now don't get me wrong, people, I really like Cornell. I almost went there instead of Berkeley. But when some nut tries to convince me that Cornell is a better school than Berkeley, I'm forced to lay the smackdown....because there is no data that supports such claims. I'm posting here b/c some guy at the Berkeley forum (my interest) said he's starting a Cornell vs. Berkeley thread to help him decide which school to attend, and hence it's my duty to represent Berkeley in the face of clowns such as one particular guy from NorCal. It's sad, every year I have to do this at least once...last year it was some Yalie named Gutrade. After this post, he pretty much learned his place: <a href="http://talk.collegeconfidential.com...0545#post670545%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://talk.collegeconfidential.com...0545#post670545&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

2

<p>The 4th link might not work, so here are the relevant details mentioned....</p>

<p>FYI, this is an excerpt from a Powerpoint presentation on Medical Deprtment Recruiting by:</p>

<p>CAPT Cynthia Macri, MC, USN
Vice President, Recruitment & Diversity
Uniformed Services University</p>

<p>Top Ten Pre-Med Colleges By Number of Med School Applications
UCLA - 611
UC Berkeley - 536
U Michigan – 522
UT Austin - 391
UF Gainesville - 385
UCSD – 345
Harvard – 307
UW Madison – 305
UVA – 303
UIUC – 300
Stanford - 300</p>

3

<p>Wanna show some percentages or are you concluding that UF is better than Harvard at premed?</p>

4

<p>These are the 5 statements I made:</p>

<ol>
<li>Berkeley data is incomplete.</li>
<li>It's hard for any public school to compete with elite privates in med school acceptances.</li>
<li>Lower quality of study body</li>
<li>Interesting that none of the students on the senior panel were going to med school immediately following undergrad (I actually attended a similar panel at Cornell this Wed. All but one were going to med school after undergrad. I was more interested in the one senior taking a year off since that's what I'm planning to do)</li>
<li>And please stop accusing schools of screening their applicants just because they have a higher acceptance rate than Berkeley lol </li>
</ol>

<p>If people believe any of these are not true, then feel free to debate :)</p>

5

<p>
[quote]
1) Berkeley data is incomplete......yeah, so why are you drawing conclusions from it?? According to a UCSF med representative who was answering questions last year, last year was Berkeley students' best year in terms of admissions to UCSF med.....over 25 students (20% of the entering medical class) were Berkeley alumni....many took time off before applying. You won't find this info in the data set you were looking at but this came from a UCSF med school rep. Hmmmmm. So apparently, many Berkeley students don't report their acceptances/plans to Berkeley. Understandable, as Berkeley allows its students to apply independently of the school.</p>

<p>2) It's hard for any public school to compete with elite privates in med school acceptances? Apparently not. <a href="http://mstp.stanford.edu/students.html%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://mstp.stanford.edu/students.html&lt;/a>
Here is the list of MD/PhD students at Stanford...I count 4 Berkeley alumni and only 2 Cornellians....and 2 each from U of Arizona and Oregon State, as a matter of fact. Either you're wrong or Cornell isn't as "elite" as you hoped it to be, clown. Okay, now this will REALLY make you cry: <a href="http://medschool.ucsf.edu/mstp/students/%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://medschool.ucsf.edu/mstp/students/&lt;/a> . Here is the list of MD/PhD students at UCSF. I count NINE BERKELEY ALUMNI AND ZERO CORNELL ALUMNI. So where are the Cornellians?...I'll be fair by mentioning the stats for the MD/PhD program where Cornellians are most likely to be found: <a href="http://www.med.cornell.edu/mdphd/students/%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.med.cornell.edu/mdphd/students/&lt;/a> . I count 13 Cornellians and 4 Berkeley students. Hmmmm, I guess Cornell wins as expected......but then again, why would the Berkeley students do their MD/PhD if they got into UCSF's MD/PhD (UCSF is ranked 4th for research/medicine ....Cornell is 15th........and UCSF is ranked higher in terms of graduate education in the biological sciences than Cornell is). Also, I tried to find the stats for Harvard and Yale's MD/PhD programs but I couldn't find them......I could go on and on but I think I made my point: Cornell doesn't have an edge over Berkeley.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>While I am not going to get into the fray over which is better for premed, Cornell or Berkeley, I would say that simply looking at the numbers of students from public undergrad schools who go on to med-school is an extremely flawed way of looking at the issue for one simple reason - public undergrad schools tend to be far far larger than private schools are. For example, you would Berkeley and other public schools to place lots of students into med-schools for the simple reason that they have lots of students PERIOD. Obviously if you just have lots and lots of students, you ought to be able to place lots of them into med-school. </p>

<p>As a case in point, look at it this way. Arizona State, all by itself, has more undergraduates than do the entire top 10 USNews research universities combined. And that's just one public system in one state, and it's not even close to being the most populous state. The vast vast majority of undergraduate students in the US attend public schools. </p>

<p>What we should really be talking about are the PERCENTAGES of students who are able to get into med-school.</p>

6

<p>Percentages galore!</p>

<p>Berkeley's admit rate to top med schools in the last few years:</p>

<p>Harvard-3/361 (less than a 1% acceptance rate)
Johns Hopkins-9/340 (2.6%)
Columbia-12/132 (9%)
Cornell-9/322 (2.8%)
Duke-5/281 (1.8%)
Stanford-15/470 (3.2%)
UChicago-11/349 (3.2%)
Upenn-4/293 (1.4%)
University of Washington-6/150 (4%)
WashU-19/234 (8.1%)
Yale-6/288 (2%)</p>

<p>Berkeley's med school acceptance rates:
<a href="http://career.berkeley.edu/MedStats/national.stm%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://career.berkeley.edu/MedStats/national.stm&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

<p>Cornell's med school acceptance rates:
<a href="http://www.career.cornell.edu/HealthCareers/acceptedApplied.html%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.career.cornell.edu/HealthCareers/acceptedApplied.html&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

<p>I don't see what the big deal is. All because I generalized Berkeley and Cornell's acceptance rates as:</p>

<p>Cal: High 50's-low 60's
Cornell: High 70's-80</p>

<p>And I pointed out that he was wrong in saying that Cornell screens it's applicants when clearly it says on the link above:</p>

<p>"If you are comparing Cornell's acceptance rates to other colleges, keep in mind that Cornell does not prevent any student from applying and includes in the Cornell data all those who applied."</p>

<p>It's not an indictment of Berkeley. Berkeley's probably the best public school in the country for premed.</p>

<p>I don't have any bias against public schools in California. My top choice for med school is UCSF.</p>

7

<p>*sigh. The point of the 4th link is to show that the data presented by the Berkeley Career Center that norcalguy so happily posts is representative of <150 out of >500 medical applicants at Berkeley, and to prove to norcalguy that Berkeley produces more med school applicants than Cornell does (norcalguy claimed otherwise). Thus the point of the link was simply to show that anyone quoting stats on Berkeley med admissions is working on incomplete data...and a non-random sampling and hence I was showing that the data can't be used to argue for or against favoring or disfavoring Berkeley's pre-med admissions over any other school's. </p>

<p>No where in any thread have I ever suggested that the more med applicants, the better the school for pre-med preparation. I don't understand how anyone can interpret the information I posted in that way. </p>

<p>And since norcalguy loves proportions, let's discuss proportions of each school's undergraduates who apply to med school:</p>

<p>Assumption: 1) The undergraduate population has been reasonably steady for the last couple years for both schools (although Berkeley's freshman class HAS been increasing a little over the last couple years and even though this fact would disadvantage Berkeley in the method I propose below, i'll use it anyway because I don't think it'd make that much of difference) and 2) since the retention (graduation rate) for Berkeley and Cornell's freshmen are similar, the # of med school applicants will be divided by undergrduate population to determine an arbitrary proportion of med school applicant per undergraduate for both schools. Because i'm too lazy to find out how many seniors there are at Berkeley and Cornell (I really should be using seniors instead of total undergraduates), i'm going to use the total population unless someone can reasonably disprove the 2 assumptions I made. In that case, feel free to do your own calculations and correct me. So here it is (undergrad populations data stolen from Wiki):</p>

<p>Berkeley: 540 med school applicants / 23,000 undergrads = 0.0235
Cornell: 220 med school applicants / 13,600 undergrads = 0.0162</p>

<p>So a higher proportion of Berkeley undergrads apply to med school than Cornell undergrads. WITHOUT considering the acceptance rates yet, two reasonable hypotheses can be made to explain the numbers: 1) There is a higher proportion of high-achieving students at Berkeley , or 2) Cornell discourages low-achieving students from applying. NOW let's consider the acceptance rates**(see bottom)....67% for Berkeley in 2004 and 76% for Cornell in 2004. Norcalguy already pointed out that Cornell doesn't have a committee that prevents pre-meds from applying if their stats are low, so cancel out hypothesis number 2. The acceptance rate issue shows that hypothesis number 1 is probably false...but let's check: Now multiply the above proportions by the acceptance rates to come up with an index for both schools that represents the proportion of undergrads in 2004 for both schools that can say that they are going to med school:</p>

<p>Berkeley: 0.0235 x 0.67%= 0.0157
Cornell: 0.0162 x 0.76% = 0.0123</p>

<p>THUS it is shown that proportionally, Berkeley students are SLIGHTLY MORE likely to go on to med school than Cornell students are. </p>

<p>AND I didn't even factor in the whole situation of most Berkeley pre-meds being California residents (their state medical schools are the ultra-competitive UC med schools while most Cornell pre-meds have the luxury of applying to their not-so-competitive state schools).</p>

<p>HOWEVER, my final opinion is what i've been saying all along:</p>

<p>It's a wash. Choose your school based on how you like the campus, environment, etc because comparing numbers between Cornell and Berkeley just won't produce an answer in terms of which one is "better." They are equally badass schools. The bottom line is this: If you're smart and dedicated, you'll get into med school whether or not you go to Berkeley or Cornell. </p>

<p>**keep in mind that i'm using the Berkeley Career Center's incomplete admissions data for this purpose.....but there is no evidence that the acceptance rate would be higher OR lower if complete data is known so i'm using this data because it doesn't favor norcalguy's or my argument.</p>

8

<p>
[quote]
so happily posts is representative of <150 out of >500 medical applicants at Berkeley, and to prove to norcalguy that Berkeley produces more med school applicants than Cornell does (norcalguy claimed otherwise). Thus the point of the link was simply to show that anyone quoting stats on Berkeley med admissions is working on incomplete data...and a non-random sampling and hence I was showing that the data can't be used to argue for or against favoring or disfavoring Berkeley's pre-med admissions over any other school's.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Uh, I believe that you have made a major logical mistake. You say that the Berkeley premed data is incomplete. This is true. On the other hand, you assume that the Cornell premed data is complete. This is not true. BOTH sets of data are incomplete. In fact, all premed data of any kind from any school will be inherently incomplete simply because no school can force all of their students to report whether they got in and if so, at which schools. </p>

<p>In fact, the most comprehensive data that can be found anywhere is the AAMC/AMCAS data, which shows that, in 2005, 605 Berkeleyians (of all races) applied to med-school, compared to 441 Cornellians.</p>

<p><a href="http://www.aamc.org/data/facts/2005/mwhite.htm%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.aamc.org/data/facts/2005/mwhite.htm&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

<p>So when you recompute the figures, you get the following:</p>

<p>Berkeley:605 applicants/23000 undergrads = 0.02630
Cornell:441 applicants/13000 undergrads = 0.03384</p>

<p>So, actually, it is actually CORNELL that has a higher proportion of its students applying to med-school. And the published data of the voluntary surveys indicates that Cornell does indeed have a slightly higher admit rate. One could argue that the Berkeley data is skewed (because, like you said, not every Berkeley premed reported in), but the Cornell data is skewed too because not every Cornell premed reported in. I don't know of any reason why the Berkeley data would be any MORE skewed than the Cornell data.</p>

9

<p>..............................</p>

10

<p>Good find.</p>

<p>I said the Berkeley data was incomplete, and hence should not be used. Norcalguy said the Berkeley data was incomplete, and he used it anyway to compare the two schools. Pretty much my whole point was that you can't cross-compare med school admissions data between the two schools. BUT if you WERE to use the flawed data, then this is what you'd find: </p>

<p>sakky said: "Berkeley:605 applicants/23000 undergrads = 0.02630
Cornell:441 applicants/13000 undergrads = 0.03384"</p>

<p>Not to be too picky, it's 13600 for cornell, and according to Wiki (I rechecked), "Campus Enrollment : The following statistics are calculated from the Fall 2004 enrollment and were released by the University of California system (the 2005 statistics will be released Fall 2006):</p>

<pre><code>* Total Enrollment: 30,269
* Undergraduate Enrollment: 22,144 .........."
</code></pre>

<p>so it'd be:</p>

<p>Berkeley:605 applicants/22100 undergrads = 0.02738
Cornell:441 applicants/13600 undergrads = 0.03243</p>

<p>multiply the two numbers by their respective acceptance rates,</p>

<p>Berkeley: 0.0183
Cornell: 0.0246</p>

<p>Now at this point I'd suggest (for the 224398574984th time) that Berkeley's disadvantage in being a California public school accounts for the discrepency.</p>

<p>Thanks for the heads-up sakky.</p>

11

<ol>
<li><p>Norcalguy, we're talking pre-med, right? So you're claim, number three, is that the average actual pre-med (those that actually start the sequence, as opposed to the more whimsical types) are better at Cornell than Berkeley? Is your evidence the admissions process and average stats of the whole student population? Or are you talking about in general? Could you clarify?</p></li>
<li><p>Does number four really matter? Is the group tha tyou saw representative of Cornell, and is what you imagine of Berkeley representative of it?</p></li>
<li><p>Some schools do screen their applicants. If someone claims this obviously they should provide evidence or explain what they mean. I mean, I could argue that Cornell does screen their applicants more based on the general admissions process, but I don't think that's what was claimed. Certainly the burden of proof is on the other claim and not you, but if you could provide anything that proves it wrong, all the easier.</p></li>
</ol>

12

<ol>
<li>abcdef claims Cornell screens on the basis that it has a committee that writes rec letters for its applicants. He accused ND of the same thing. His reasoning is that any school with a high(er) acceptance rate than Berkeley (ie acceptance rates in the 80's and 90's) must have screened. Clearly that is a wild accusation with no basis in reality.
And, yes, some schools do screen their applicants. Not Cornell.</li>
</ol>

<h1>4 was just an note. It's not even up for debate. I just found it interesting because I attended a premed panel of seniors this week at Cornell and then came back to read another thread discussing the premed senior panel at Berkeley. If I had attended the panel at Berkeley, I would've noted the fact that none of the seniors were going to med schoool right out of college as interesting as well.</h1>

<h1>3 is a statement made on the fact that Berkeley is a public school (and therefore its applicant pool is limited), its freshman (not necessarily premeds) have lower avg. SAT scores (the best basis for measuring student quality across schools), and the fact Berkeley accepts an inordinate amount of transfers from community colleges after two years. I am from Norcal obviously and have seen many friends/HS classmates go to CC for two years, get a 3.9, and then transfer to Berkeley. This is why I believe the discrepancy in SAT scores between Berkeley juniors and Cornell juniors is even bigger than the discrepancy b/w freshmen. Is there a reason you believe that the difference between Cornell premeds and Berkeley premeds might not be representative of the difference between the student body as a whole?</h1>

<p>It is also important to note that two of Cornell's schools (Hotel Admin and Architecture) produce just about 0 premeds and those are the two schools that place very little emphasis on SAT scores (median SAT score might be in the 1200's). It is arguable that Cornell premeds would have SIGNIFICANTLY higher SAT scores than the Cornell student body as a whole.</p>

13

<p>"5. abcdef claims Cornell screens on the basis that it has a committee that writes rec letters for its applicants. He accused ND of the same thing. His reasoning is that any school with a high(er) acceptance rate than Berkeley (ie acceptance rates in the 80's and 90's) must have screened. Clearly that is a wild accusation with no basis in reality.
And, yes, some schools do screen their applicants. Not Cornell.".................</p>

<p>...............yeah, i already corrected myself about Cornell having a committee....and I NEVER REASONED THAT JUST BECAUSE A SCHOOL HAS A HIGH MED ACCEPTANCE RATE IT MUST HAVE A COMMITTEE. Where did you pull that one out of?</p>

<p>"#4 was just an note. It's not even up for debate. I just found it interesting because I attended a premed panel of seniors this week at Cornell and then came back to read another thread discussing the premed senior panel at Berkeley. If I had attended the panel at Berkeley, I would've noted the fact that none of the seniors were going to med schoool right out of college as interesting as well"........................</p>

<p>..............WHY DOES IT MATTER AS YOU AND I AND YOUR COUSIN'S FRIEND'S MOTHER'S BLIND UNCLE KNOWS THAT MOST BERKELEY PRE-MEDs WHO GO ON TO MED SCHOOL ARE SENIORS AND NOT STUDENTS TAKING TIME OFF. You do realize that your experience attending ONE panel at Cornell and what you read of ONE panel at Berkeley is no basis for an argument whatsoever so the fact that you put it up there in the first place is simply meaningless. </p>

<p>"#3 is a statement made on the fact that Berkeley is a public school (and therefore its applicant pool is limited), its freshman (not necessarily premeds) have lower avg. SAT scores (the best basis for measuring student quality across schools), and the fact Berkeley accepts an inordinate amount of transfers from community colleges after two years. I am from Norcal obviously and have seen many friends/HS classmates go to CC for two years, get a 3.9, and then transfer to Berkeley. This is why I believe the discrepancy in SAT scores between Berkeley juniors and Cornell juniors is even bigger than the discrepancy b/w freshmen. Is there a reason you believe that the difference between Cornell premeds and Berkeley premeds might not be representative of the difference between the student body as a whole?".......................</p>

<p>...................Firstly, you and I both know that the slight SAT score discrepency can be explained by the fact that Cornell and Berkeley look at SAT scores in DIFFERENT ways such that it puts Berkeley (and all UCs) at a disadvantage when reporting SAT scores. Secondly, how do you know that transfer student pre-meds (and transfer students in general) at Berkeley are of a lower quality? Do you think YOU know better than the admissions people? I know many transfer students who are at/will attend elite PhD programs, Law schools, and MED schools. Thirdly, your whole argument with transfer students WORKS TO SUPPORT MY CLAIM if anything because it shows that the med admissions numbers for FRESHMEN-ADMITS who go on to apply to med school (who we're trying to help on this particular thread) are actually HIGHER than presented in the data because the data is "contaminated" by transfers students who you claim are sub-par. The transfer argument is a lost cause, my friend....so give it up. Seriously, what are you going to argue next? That the fact that Cornell favors legacies puts it at a disadvantage? That Cornell admits higher-achieving under-rep minorities than Berkeley so it's "better" (because it has a larger pool to choose from and greater recruitment resources)? That Berkeley having Division I sports allows more "less scholastic" athletes to enroll as students? Let's stick to what's RELEVANT. </p>

<p>"It is also important to note that two of Cornell's schools (Hotel Admin and Architecture) produce just about 0 premeds and those are the two schools that place very little emphasis on SAT scores (median SAT score might be in the 1200's). It is arguable that Cornell premeds would have SIGNIFICANTLY higher SAT scores than the Cornell student body as a whole."......................</p>

<p>.......................And i'm sure these two schools are very small compared to the other schools in Cornell so their effect is negligible. And I can make a similar argument with Berkeley's Haas School of Business and College of Environment Design producing 0 premeds and College of Environmental Design and College of Natural Resources having sub-standard SAT averages amongst Berkeley colleges.</p>