Berkeley vs Emory

[jasonleb1]

<p>

I find this a very poor argument. If jobs in Atlanta pay low, why not head to where the high-paying companies are? That’s what grads at top schools do.

</p>

<p>You completely misunderstood that quote. He is saying that people in California usually get a higher salary because the cost of living is higher the reverse is true for Georgia. It has nothing to do with where they graduated from, but from where they live.</p>

[UCBChemEGrad]

<p>MrPrince, rjk was answering a question.
RML’s wife attends Berkeley for grad school.</p>

<p>As for me, I never applied to any of the schools you mentioned.
I post to constructively support my alma mater and mostly to address misconceptions…that are very prevalent and pervasive on CC.</p>

<p>

Forget these foolish people. Just go with your heart. Emory and Berkeley are in the same league. Remember fit.

I agree with this part of your post…however your earlier rant makes you look like the fool.</p>

[RML]

<p>MrPrince, I’m a Berkeley reject. I did not apply to HYPS. Satisfied now? </p>

<p>I called you a liar (which, BTW, you’re quite good at it) because you lied about me and my posts. You lied when you said that I always label Berkeley undergrad as something equal to, and even superior to, those of HYP’s. You knew that I never said that. I challenge you to review all my posts and show me where I said that Berkeley undergrad is = to if not even better than HYP. </p>

<p>If you really want to know how I’d rank/assess/classify/group the top US schools, here’s how I would rank/classify/group them:</p>

<p>Group 1: HYPSM+Caltech
Group 2: the rest of the Ivies, Duke, Chicago, Northwestern, Michigan, JHU, Berkeley, UVa, CMU and the like
Group 3: Georgetown, Notre Dame, Rice, Vanderbilt, UCLA and the like. </p>

<p>As you can see, I do not think Berkeley is superior to HYPSMC. I do find it as competitive as the lower-ranked Ivies and other top privates, however, and I can support that. However, this is not the right thread to discuss about that. </p>

<p>

You completely misunderstood that quote. He is saying that people in California usually get a higher salary because the cost of living is higher the reverse is true for Georgia. It has nothing to do with where they graduated from, but from where they live.

I totally got what he was saying. I said location shouldn’t be that much of a factor. If the school is really that highly-sought after by top employers, their HRDs would chase their graduates even if the school is located in the mountain of Colorado or in a remote village in Alaska. I gave Dartmouth as an example. I guess no one would disagree with me when I say NH isn’t a very progressive State relative to Texas, Florida, Philadelphia, Massachusetts, and more so, California and NY. Yet why is it that Dartmouth tops in a survey that covers salary scale of graduates/alumni? If you don’t want to accept Dartmouth as an example, take Duke instead. Why is Duke, also a Southern based school, doing better than Emory in surveys that cover salary scale of graduates? </p>

<p>

Emory and Berkeley are in the same league. Remember fit.

That’s your personal opinion and I respect that. But I would not put them in the same league. Maybe I can agree when you say Emory would perhaps be a better fit, or a more desirable school for premed, but in terms of institution classification, they do not belong to the same group. You are only fooling yourself when you say they both belong to the same league.</p>

<p>

RML’s wife attends Berkeley for grad school.

UCBChemgrad, actually, my wife earned her economics undergrad degree from Berkeley and later attended the 1-year MBA program at The Judge Business School, University of Cambridge, UK.</p>

[MrPrince]

<p>RML, alright, I’ll give you that you believe HYPSMC are better than Berkeley. You have said that in your previous posts. But it sometimes feels that you’re wishing Berkeley was among the HYPSMC level. To you right after HYPSMC, its Berkeley.

Okay, here’s my argument.</p>

<p>Selectivity does not ONLY and always connote elite-ness. By elite, I mean prestigious, well-known, rich, productive, selective and staffed with highly distinguished people who are leaders of their fields. Dartmouth and Brown may qualify on certain criteria. But they obviously lag behind on some. Cal may lag behind Dartmouth/Brown in selectivity, but only very slightly. In addition to that, Cal would eat Dartmouth and Brown alive on the rest of the criteria.</p>

<p>The Berkeley name is famous, not just in the US, but in the entire world. I can assure you that there are many more people in the world that have heard and be wowed by the Berkeley name than a Dartmouth/Brown name. In the UK, Ireland, Italy, the Philippines, Singapore, Malaysia and Thailand, Brown is a color. lol… Berkeley is a world-class academic institution. And, the Dartmouth name? It’s almost never heard of… In these countries where I once lived, it doesn’t matter if Brown is slightly more selective than Cal. What matters in those countries is the name. The brand. The Berkeley name is way more prestigious and powerful than the Dartmouth/Brown name. In these countries, Berkeley has a strong alumni association and some of its alumni occupy high seats in government and large organizations and corporations.</p>

<p>sakky: I think it’s a misnomer to base the university fund on endowment fund alone. Academic institutions have several sources of funding not just endowment fund. State Us receive funding from the government too, aside from tuition fees generated by the school. Dartmouth and Brown, though have slightly higher endowment fund than Cal has, don’t receive funding from the government as much as Cal does. So, to base the school’s funding from endowment alone is a huge misnomer. And some research-led schools like Cal, UCLA, UIUC, Florida, Washington, UMich and Texas do get money from tie-up private corporations. CITRIS of Cal is a good example. They also make money from patents and inventions of their researches. That’s why if you would look at their facilities, they’re more advanced and high-tech than those facilities found at Dartmouth and Brown.</p>

<p>I also think that Dartmouth and Brown do not have the resources to compete with schools like Berkeley because science and engineering facilities are quite expensive. (you of all the people here on CC should have known that.) Their whole endowment fund --even if you’d combine them which would only go over 5 billion-- wouldn’t be enough to establish a science, tech and engineering community. Even Harvard tried to improve their engineering a decade ago and poured several hundreds of millions of dollars on the program, but it didn’t succeed. Yale has also done that and also didn’t succeed. If H and Y, the richer and more prestigious schools, had a hard time boosting their tech and engineering communities, how much more the less prestigious and less moneyed schools such as Dartmouth and Brown.

This is one of your many bashings of the lower Ivy League Plus to promote Berkeley over them. I can’t begin to count how many universities you’ve put down to promote your disgusting Berkeley.
<a href=“http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/college-search-selection/677355-what-considered-americas-elite-colleges-5.html?highlight=Berkeley+RML+Stanford+Princeton+Harvard+Yale[/url]”>http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/college-search-selection/677355-what-considered-americas-elite-colleges-5.html?highlight=Berkeley+RML+Stanford+Princeton+Harvard+Yale&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

[RML]

<p>

But it sometimes feels that you’re wishing Berkeley was among the HYPSMC level. To you right after HYPSMC, its Berkeley.

</p>

<p>Ahh… so that’s what’s bothering you, boy?
No; you shouldn’t be bothered by such wishes, because almost all schools, if not at all ALL schools, wish that they were at HYPSMC level. Every school president use HYPSMC as the benchmark of school success, so it shouldn’t bother you when even Berkeley’s undergrad wished it were on HYPSMC level.</p>

<p>As to the ones you quoted, those were obviously not bashing. Those were statements made because they were called upon the situation. those statements did not just come out of the blues in a hope to bash schools. Those statements were made to compare Berkeley with the lower-ranked ivies. Of course, Berkeley is famous abroad. I would be lying to you if I’ll say that it isn’t. You want proofs:</p>

<p><a href=“http://www.webometrics.info/[/url]”>http://www.webometrics.info/&lt;/a&gt;
[ARWU</a> 2010](<a href=“http://www.arwu.org/ARWU2010.jsp]ARWU”>http://www.arwu.org/ARWU2010.jsp)
<a href=“http://www.topuniversities.com/sites/default/files/QS_World_University_Rankings_top500.pdf[/url]”>http://www.topuniversities.com/sites/default/files/QS_World_University_Rankings_top500.pdf&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

<p>Do you know of any globally-based ranking that say Berkeley is not a major player in the race? I don’t.</p>

[MrPrince]

<p>^You should be careful when you address MrPrince.
And why should I be bothered? I’m already IN a HYPSM class university. First off, I actually don’t believe HYPSM is in a class of their own unlike you. But since you do, I’ll speak in your terms.
I’m just concerned that you think Berkeley is even Ivy Level. Lower Ivy level. A large population at Berkeley would choose Dartmouth and Brown over Cal in a heartbeat.
I refuse to take “webometrics” seriously. Perhaps if they changed their horrid name to RMLmetrics my interest in the ranking might actually increase by 10%–significant increase no? </p>

<p>ARMU is graduate school. Even then I refuse to take a ranking that puts UCSD over UPenn seriously.</p>

[RML]

<p>

0.7 Convert to percentages, multiply by 5. The difference comes up under 10%. Barely significant. 0.2 converted to percentages is 4%. Which is not statistically significant.

Granted your computation is correct, 10% is significant. What is insignificant is .9% or .01%. But 10% of 2,500 people is about 250 people’s voices. That is significant. But that’s not how to interpret that table. Saying Berkeley having .7 advantage point than Emory does not mean there were 250 people who rated Berkeley as a superior school. There could be many more, maybe even a thousand of them or all of them rated Berkeley as a school equal to Yale and Caltech. It could be all the 2,500 people agreed that Berkeley is a 4.7 school in a scale of 1 to 5 where 5 is the highest, and all 2,500 people rated Emory just a 4.0 school. Again, I’m not saying all the 2,500 academicians rated that way, but it is very highly possible that they do, given that Berkeley is a world-class academic institution and an academic powerhouse. </p>

<p>

As for my comment on public opinion, the first poll you noted was public only, meaning it’s irrelevant. As to the second pole you posted, graduate students typically know only those fields they are familiar with and will typically only list those schools that are (1) strong in their own area and (2) easily memorable.

Ohhh… So, you are saying that you are more knowledgeable than those over a thousand graduate students who participated in the survey. Wow! </p>

<p>

As for your undergrad major, computer science never came up in this thread - since, well… Idk… The thread isn’t about you and your computer science? For grad school - business, med and law (the most popular grad schools) top LACs beat UCB.

But I also mentioned premed, engineering and business. LOL</p>

[MrPrince]

<p>RML, think about it. How many people have you argued about this against? Brown and Dartmouth vs Berkeley. I’ve seen countless threads and countless users who have repeatedly told you that Dartmouth and Brown are considerably high in prestige compared to Berkeley. You still persist alone because you were somehow rejected by Berkeley when you got into Columbia, Duke, and Stanford which for some reason made you develop a fetish for Berkeley…don’t you get TIRED?
Tell me RML, how are you any different from a terrorist hmm? A terrorist doesn’t accept the ways of life and constant bombards society uselessly to make a point. They don’t realize that they aren’t getting any further in their endeavors.
You are the same. You keep bombarding people with Berkeley >> Ivies. Yet you aren’t changing anyone’s opinion.
That said, I’m done here. Good luck OP. And remember, don’t listen to RML.</p>

[RML]

<p>

^You should be careful when you address me.

and WHY? LOL</p>

<p>

And why should I be bothered? I’m already IN a HYPSM class university.

Really? I’m so sorry. It doesn’t show. LOL
I’ve been trying to accept that for over a month now but my mind is not registering (or accepting) it. The guys I know who went there don’t have an iota of your characteristic. Again, it doesn’t show. And, if it’s indeed true that MIT accepted you, it made me feel vindicated. LOL</p>

<p>

First off, I actually don’t believe HYPSM is in a class of their own unlike you. But since you do, I’ll speak in your terms.

Well, I honestly do, and I can support it.</p>

<p>

I’m just concerned that you think Berkeley is even Ivy Level. Lower Ivy level.

Again, which Ivy. Be specific because as we all know, the Ivies don’t have the same academic prestige. </p>

<p>

A large population at Berkeley would choose Dartmouth and Brown over Cal in a heartbeat.

Well, that does not make the institution better. You’re simply talking about fit and school desirability. You weren’t’ talking about academic quality, were you? I can also argue that Cornell students would rather attend UPenn or Brown, yet I have problems believing that Cornell is an inferior school to Brown/UPenn. I think they all belong to the same league.</p>

<p>

I refuse to take “webometrics” seriously. Perhaps if they changed their horrid name to RMLmetrics my interest in the rankings might actually increase by 3%.

Like I said, it does not mater what you personally believe or like or dislike. What matters are the facts I presented. And just in case you’re lost why I provided that, I did it to support my claim that Berkeley is wide-known/prestigious/respected abroad.</p>

[NYU2013]

<p>I never claimed to be more intelligent then they are. Surveys are notoriously inaccurate when dealing with subjective material. If 1000 grad students were asked, do we know that there was a wide range of grad students in many fields asked? How knowledgeable was each person surveyed? And the most important question is, how familiar are they with every schools graduate programs? Oh wait, they’re not. It’s all purely subjective. Most rankings are. There is no way to prove X school is better than Y school in any substantial way. And again, you’ve missed the point of my analysis. It’s a less than 10% difference in .07 and a less than 5% difference in .02. Statistical significance is determined by greater than 5%. Which means the guidance counselor rankings are irrelevant. The number of people surveyed does not play an integral role. Only the final tally numbers represented, because these give the average. Individual ratings are not significant, as otherwise we would have to go by 1000 different scale rankings. Rankings are, inherently, a basis by which to judge schools. They are not absolute. Different criteria result in different rankings. Different groups surveyed results in different rankings. At the best, rankings are a bench mark, but by no means absolute. </p>

<p>When judging XYZ schools against ABC school, arguments over XYZ being better than ABC are, generally, both not accurate nor are they sensible. A T20 is a T20. People who argue over schools being better than one another generally only provide opinion, based on what they believe to be fact. I can honestly say before reading much into CC boards, I believed there to be no significant difference among T20 schools. (I still believe there is not any real difference that creates any measurably different outcome for any individual student -but seeing so many argument over which T20 schools are better constantly makes me wonder. Compare these T20 schools to the some odd 4,000 colleges and universities in the US and ALL quantitative evidence indicates there is absolutely no difference) In actuality, I can say people like RML who argue constantly over X schools being better than Y school are doing more harm than good at least when it comes to advising people on where they should attend. Hard factual evidence is by far and large more beneficiary to questions posed such as this one - such FA provided, cost, housing, classes, major, resources, etc.</p>

[RML]

<p>

I’ve seen countless threads and countless users who have repeatedly told you that Dartmouth and Brown are considerably high in prestige compared to Berkeley.

</p>

<p>MrPrince,</p>

<p>Again, young man, listen. If you can convince the majority of those school presidents, provosts, college deans, academicians, scholars, researchers and top employers that Brown and Dartmouth are superior to Berkeley, then you can convince me as well. Until then, I’m treating your claims bogus, immature and ignorant. Sorry; talk to your fellow janitors at MIT.</p>

[RML]

<p>NYU2013, </p>

<p>the Gallup pole isn’t accurate. But it is a collective data of more than a thousand grad students/graduates. Whatever you’ll say, their collective opinion weighs heavier than yours and of MrPrince’s. Period.</p>

[alam1]

<p>RML still a Berkeley fanboy? How much is that school paying you to be a cheerleader? Can’t be much. I hear they’re going through some financial problems…</p>

[RML]

<p>^ That’s what bashing is.</p>

[MrPrince]

<p><a href=“http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/college-search-selection/677355-what-considered-americas-elite-colleges-5.html?highlight=RML+Berkeley+Yale+Princeton+Harvard[/url]”>http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/college-search-selection/677355-what-considered-americas-elite-colleges-5.html?highlight=RML+Berkeley+Yale+Princeton+Harvard&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

<p>

My only higher education experience in the US was at Stanford where I’ve trained for 6 months under a Google sponsored training in 2001. It wasn’t a degree program; just a graduate certification. Up until 5 months ago, I was with Asian Development Bank where my colleagues come from some of the best schools on earth! My background and experience may be quite different from yours, but I’m certainly far from less informed.

…Wow…with this much experience, you still ramble about like a fool, Cambridge man.

And WHY? LOL

You realize you’re picking fights with various people online who are probably 25+ years younger to you. And you’re telling ME that you think I don’t exude the qualities of an MIT student. How naive and disgusting.

1. You’re full of contradictions and ignorance.

If you can convince the majority of those school presidents, provosts, college deans, academicians, scholars, researchers and top employers that Brown and Dartmouth are superior to Berkeley…

You’re the one who doesn’t seem to realize that people don’t THINK of superiority and inferiority this way. Colleges exist for one thing: To make this world a better place. No one compares their institutions with others in a serious way at ALL. Do you mean to tell me that a prof working in University of Arizona is inferior to one working at Harvard?
2) It’s a fact that people will be more impressed with a Brown or Dartmouth undergrad degree over a Berkeley one. Sorry. Not only am I saying it, but pretty much anyone who isn’t rjkofnovi and co.
3) You’re an old man. Please stop using “lol.” It doesn’t make you sound any younger. Your failure of an attempt to conform to this newer generation is just pathetic.</p>

[arcadefire1027]

<p>Berkeley’s a better overall school than Dartmouth/Brown because of its research contributions, but Brown and Dartmouth are significantly better places to be an undergrad since the students are smarter. That’s the second most important aspect of an undergrad institution (after “fit”), in my opinion.</p>

[DunninLA]

<p>is this how Asians correspond with each other outside this BB?</p>

[arcadefire1027]

<p>I think this whole thread is silly.</p>

<p>Heck, I think the whole idea of comparing schools based on stupid irrelevant things like “prestige” is silly. Kids should just go where they want to go.</p>

<p>I don’t know why I even post on this website anymore…it’s addicting I guess. I need to move onto some grad school forums.</p>

[drax12]

<p>

Mr Prince, #3</p>

<p>Emory isn’t as widely known as Berkeley. Nevertheless, Emory is a great school. It all comes to fit. Personally, I’d choose Berkeley as it’s in California. Why should I leave San Fransisco for…EWW Atlanta??

</p>

<p>Atlanta is one of the burgeoning commerce centers in the US. Great happening city also. Durham or Atlanta? No brainer for cities, Atlanta. </p>

<p>

Nighthawk, #5</p>

<p>Both colleges are great, but objective observers do not agree with the premise that Berkeley is more prestigious than Emory. In terms of prestige, they are about even. In fact, if you look at the most popular ranking source, USN&WR, Emory, at # 20, is ahead of Berkeley at #22. In terms of fit, they are quite dissimilar, as Emory is a mid-sized private national university while Berkeley is huge. The Emory campus is beautiful, unique and pristine, while Berkeley is a bit rundown looking. If you are stuck on California, inevitably, UCLA will be ranked ahead of Berkeley. The rankings are closer and closer every year, with UCLA getting more applicants than Berkeley. The student body is more well-rounded at UCLA, and the campus is a lot nicer.</p>

<p>

GoBlue81, #23</p>

<p>Any objective proof for that statement? It’s true that UCLA gets more application, but Berkeley has significantly better yield from virtually the same application pool (41.4% to 36.7%). Who is winning the cross admit battle? Care to comment on that?

</p>

<p>Cross-admit battle between the schools is pretty even. Your yield rates are pretty off btw because of infusion of non-residents.</p>

<p>UCLA does indeed have more well-rounded students. </p>

<p>UCLA: more arts - Theatre, film, etc, but is excellent in the sciences, biochem, computer engineering, physics, etc. Cal is engineering, sciences, the meat and potatoes of academia, but still doesn’t produce more MD’s. Probably more scientists, but this is because UCLA students are more scholastically diverse.</p>

<p>Area, UCLA v Cal, the westside of LA v Eastbay of SF. UCLA by far. So many more places to explore in WLA over Berkeley and some of the other run-down areas of ESF Bay. Bart, or whatever to get to various parts of SF, cross Bay Bridge, whatever, to get to SF and the nicer parts of the SB Peninsula, but one has to travel a bit. At UCLA, take Sunset east to nightlife/clubs, west to the beach. </p>

<p>UCLA: Better connection to Hollywood behind or in front of the camera, which is the unique industry of CA. At mid or north campus, students say, “Law or entertainment or general business, which is it for you?”</p>

<p>UCLA - far better looking coeds, more athletic student body. UCLA is about athletic gear, shorts; Cal is about the unkempt look, holey levis, dressing down, etc. The coeds at Cal are downright doggy… woof, woof.</p>

<p>Bottom line, if one could replicate onself and put him or herself at any UC school, then he or she would be just as successful at any of the UC schools. Therefore, it’s all about fit and fun. Don’t worry about “prestige” of faculty. </p>

<p>Therefore among the UC’s, atmosphere in general, UCLA > UCSB >>> UCB.</p>

[UCBChemEGrad]

<p>^ All superficial reasons for a university located in a superficial city.</p>