<p>so i live out of state, and will not get instate at berkeley...andd i did not recieve any financial aid.. so taking the money factor out of the picture... is it better to go to usc which is private and in socal( I LOVE THE WEATHER) and the classes mayb smaller...OR berkeley where it is slighty better academically ???</p>
<p>USC. It's academics are on the rise and it's a great atmosphere.</p>
<p>As an OOS student, keep in mind that Berkeley's student body is about 95% from California. USC's student body is considerably more geographically diverse, with only about 50% from California. That might influence your opinion (it certainly would mine).</p>
<p>go to Berkeley.... you will not regret it even if 95% of students are from California. And when people ask you where do you go to school and you say Berkeley, they will look at you with a lot of respect and admiration</p>
<p>^ except from me. Generally, I had never liked berkeley. Its enviroment is really corrupt. I even know this girl who went to Berekely, a great student with almost perfect SATs scores but then disappeared with a hobo/hippie just after her freshman year. She's asian too. Plus, the social scene at USC is VERY exciting (especially the football games). And I have checked the course catalog at USC- its diverse and interesting.</p>
<p>OOO and great school spirit. I'm biased cuz once a trojan, always a trojan :)</p>
<p>"I even know this girl who went to Berekely, a great student with almost perfect SATs scores but then disappeared with a hobo/hippie just after her freshman year."</p>
<p>Oh yeah, 'cause that happens ALL THE TIME.</p>
<p>To the OP: Berkeley has more prestige, generally better academics, and would probably be about the same price. In addition, its location is great: the Bay Area is awesome (vs. the yucky area in which USC resides + it's LA) and has better weather than socal (come on, everyone chooses Stanford for the weather!). The student body sizes are the same (USC has more teachers but that doesn't matter immensely, considering the size of the school anyway).</p>
<p>Kyledavid, how on earth are "the student body sizes are the same". USC has 16,000 undergrads, Berkeley has 21,000. That isn't an insignifigant difference.</p>
<p>Berkeley's prestige is also almost entirely derived from the schools Graduate programs (which are world-class, but have no effect on undergraduates).</p>
<p>Chances are Berkeley Nobel Prize winners won't be teaching you.</p>
<p>USC! The overall atmosphere is way better.</p>
<p>"how on earth are "the student body sizes are the same". USC has 16,000 undergrads, Berkeley has 21,000. That isn't an insignifigant difference."</p>
<p>I'm counting both undergrad and grad. Together, they have about the same student body sizes.</p>
<p>"Berkeley's prestige is also almost entirely derived from the schools Graduate programs (which are world-class, but have no effect on undergraduates)."</p>
<p>No. Berkeley is very well known for its grad programs, but do you think it reached fame by giving its undergrad s*itty educations? I think not. It's superb in both ways, not even considering all the other factors that have brought Cal prestige (discoveries, Nobel Prizes, Pulitzer Prizes, extremely distinguished faculty, strength of student body, difficulty of admission, unique history, etc.).</p>
<p>
[quote]
berkeley where it is slighty better academically
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Wrong. Berkeley is much better (and tougher) academically. CAL is actually fairly infamous for its back-stabbing and cut-throat atmosphere... the product of having too many overachievers forced into a pressure-cooker of a school. However, I suppose if you're looking for an easier time, you'll be better off at USC.</p>
<p>
[quote]
is it better to go to usc which is private
[/quote]
Not entirely sure why people believe private = better than public but it's a total fallacy. Sure, you'll likely have smaller class sizes but that in and of itself doesn't necessarily mean anything. I'm currently a graduate student at a top (private) business school and haven't really noticed too much of a difference in quality of education from my undergrad (UCLA).</p>
<p>
[quote]
Berkeley's prestige is also almost entirely derived from the schools Graduate programs (which are world-class, but have no effect on undergraduates).
[/quote]
Like it or not, that effect trickles down to the undergraduates. Other than its graduate schools, its undergraduate programs in business and engineering especially are top-notch.
But if we're talking about how prestige is derived, where does SC's come from?</p>
<p>
[quote]
Wrong. Berkeley is much better (and tougher) academically. CAL is actually fairly infamous for its back-stabbing and cut-throat atmosphere... the product of having too many overachievers forced into a pressure-cooker of a school.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>That's not exactly a good thing.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Like it or not, that effect trickles down to the undergraduates. Other than its graduate schools, its undergraduate programs in business and engineering especially are top-notch.
But if we're talking about how prestige is derived, where does SC's come from?
[/quote]
</p>
<p>USC's prestige certainly isn't derived from any of its graduate programs. USC is considerably more focused on undergraduate education than is Berkeley.</p>
<p>
[quote]
USC's prestige certainly isn't derived from any of its graduate programs. USC is considerably more focused on undergraduate education than is Berkeley.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>So where does USC's prestige come from? I would argue that one of the drivers of prestige is the selectivity, placement, and strength of faculty/research/student body. If "focus on undergraduate education" is the key, how does one measure that? More importantly, how can you prove that?</p>
<p>Prestige isn't something that can be measured or "proven" - so i can only give my opinion as to the driver's of USC's prestige.</p>
<p>Personally, I think the alumni network is a large driver of the schools prestige. It's extremely important to the school, and really does benefit the undergraduate students (see my post above). In terms of selectivity, USC has higher SAT scores then either UCLA or UCB (all w/ equal acceptance rates) - which certainly leads to some prestige for the undergraduate level. Generally, "strength of the student body" is USC's greatest asset.</p>
<p>I also found the following thread by a Berkeley student (8 Reasons NOT to attend Berkeley) to be quite interesting:
<a href="http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/showthread.php?t=145438%5B/url%5D">http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/showthread.php?t=145438</a></p>
<p>My 2cents:)</p>
<ol>
<li><p>For Computer Science or Electerical
If it CS&EE at Berkeley then it hands down beat USC as it is considered 2nd or 3rd in the world.</p></li>
<li><p>For Pre medical
USC has MD so it will be preferrable to go to USC than CAL.</p></li>
<li><p>For others
Goto a school that will provide more interaction with professors so take a tour and find it for yourself.</p></li>
</ol>
<p>
Not in exact quantitative measures, no. But to a certain extent, one can use the perceptions of those who are informed about academia. In any case, the request was to measure or prove USC (or any school's) "focus on undergraduate education", since you mentioned that as USC's supposed competitive advantage.</p>
<p> [quote] Personally, I think the alumni network is a large driver of the schools prestige. It's extremely important to the school, and really does benefit the undergraduate students (see my post above).
Not quite - I think the follow-on performance of the alumnus in the professional world or academia should be a driver.</p>
<p>
[quote]
In terms of selectivity, USC has higher SAT scores then either UCLA or UCB (all w/ equal acceptance rates) - which certainly leads to some prestige for the undergraduate level. Generally, "strength of the student body" is USC's greatest asset.
[/quote]
In this case, we're talking a marginal difference in SAT scores. With the SAT statistic, it's well known that USC combines (read: mix and match) and reports the highest component scores from multiple sittings whereas the UCs
can only report scores from singular sittings. Strength of student body may be USC's greatest asset but it really isn't any better than many of the schools some of its proponents claim to be better than.</p>
<p>
[quote]
I also found the following thread by a Berkeley student (8 Reasons NOT to attend Berkeley) to be quite interesting
[/quote]
Anecdotal stories are entertaining, but not good for much else. You know what they say about opinions being like a$$holes...
It's unrealistic to expect any school to report a 100% satisfaction rate.</p>
<p>^^ heh, calicartel, you've become my voice (every time I felt the bite of "zomg i have to correct this misconception," I see you already pointed it out). =)</p>
<p>I have lots of friends who have attened Berkeley. 99% of them are asian. One word: Robots.</p>