<p>ubermesch i know you're lying. its ok. athletes arent even let into berkeley with a 750 let alone actual students. the ncaa minimum is 810. really, nice try though.</p>
<p>Berkeley's undergrad engineering is VERY PRESTIGIOUS--More so than any ivies(including cornell.....even though they are still great at engineering). Berkeley's undergrad engineering has a reputation of its own and acceptance rates are sub-20% into the engineering programs. For engineering, id pick berkeley over any ivy or other university except Stanford, Calt Tech, and MIT. Engineering is pretty much godly in terms of prestige and being well-known</p>
<p>"Well as funny as this may seem, if somebody chooses Berkeley just to save money, they are probably losing out in the end. In our society, money can make a lot of difference. Money is the reason why Bush is President and not a drunken bum. Money is the reason Al Gore went to Harvard and became Vice President. Money is the reason why Kerry went to Yale and almost won the election. Money is the reason those Supreme Court Justices went to Stanford and have such high legal authority. </p>
<p>I doubt many people choose Berkeley over HYPS because of cost. But if they do, that's their loss. American society is based upon capitalism and the power of money. If I choose to save my money and not go to college at all, I'd probably be worse off than if I used that money to further my education. If I tried to save money by going to Berkeley instead of Yale, I'd probably not be as successful."</p>
<p>Uber, you are full of it. I know many people that rejected ivies to go to berkeley. Not only does it save money, but it also places them in a very lively neighborhood (compare Berkeley to Palo Alto, Princeton NJ.. etc etc.), not to mention it also has some of the greatest researchers and professors alive. Just as a little anecdote, I know a guy who turned down HYPSM, Columbia to go to Berkeley. And guess what, after two years in Berkeleys "crappy" and "inferior" undergrad programs, he scored perfect on the LSATs as a sophomore... hmmmm....And uh, people who go to Berkeley and Yale make similar amounts of money in their respective majors... hell, people who go to Berkeley probably make more simply because they are in the very very expensive bay area. Your money argument makes no sense. We're talking about colleges, not the backgrounds of famous people who went to those schools.</p>
<p>In our society, money can make a lot of difference. Money is the reason why Bush is President and not a drunken bum. </p>
<p>Do you know who President Bush's father is?!?! Both Bush's.....??? </p>
<p>Honestly, get over the fact your school doesn't define you, I feel bad for you! By going to Stanfrord will it make that much of a difference???? PROBABLY NOT. It's who you are as a person, not the college you went to. This seems to be the most popular argument on CC, that's just what I feel, you clearly feel otherwise. Good for you, in the end none of us make it out alive.</p>
<p>I see two extremes going on here. There are some people who are saying that Berkeley is mediocre and other people who are claiming that Berkeley is the next Harvard. I think the truth is that Berkeley is a decent school like UCLA, UC Davis, USC, NYU, Johns Hopkins, and Washington University in St Louis. Berkeley has built a solid reputation like those aforementioned peer schools. </p>
<p>In my opinion, there are several things that separate Berkeley from the ivy leagues:</p>
<p>1.) Prestige-A Berkeley diploma doesn't carry as much clout as one from MIT or Yale.</p>
<p>2.) Quality of Education- Berkeley's classes are probably bigger on average than ivy and ivy-plus classrooms. Gigantic lectures make it harder to interact with professors and to truly learn the material. </p>
<p>3.) Strength of sudent body- Since Berkeley is less selective than the ivy leagues, it is harder to learn from one's peers at Berkeley than it is at an ivy.</p>
<p>4.) No residential education- Since housing is not guaranteed at Berkeley for four years, it is harder to to develop a sense of community. It also makes it harder to learn from your fellow classmates. Renting a nearby apartment is not the same as living in a dorm.</p>
<p>Not a bad post from SBTB7.</p>
<p>Rooster, everything you say is true. However, for the bright, self-directed and motivated student, the educational results at Cal can be just as good as those at MIT or Yale.</p>
<p>Prestige is more overrated on this board than any overrated college, or at least a prestige differential on the order of Berkeley vs. MIT is. No matter what field you go into, you have to show your stuff and that's going to affect your career more than anything else. </p>
<p>If I were making a choice between Berkeley and MIT, I'd pick MIT for a number of reasons. But Berkeley is a fine enough school that I wouldn't diss anyone for going there or feel that I could afford to look down on them, which is one of the unpleasant subtexts of this neverending "debate."</p>
<p>Renting an apartment with friends is one heck of a lot better than living in some dorm. So many original social movements have come out of Berkeley I'd say you would have MORE going on than at virtually any campus in the US. The fact that the average SAT score is lower--while still in the top 5% nationally--hardly means there are no peers around that are at the highest level. The list of Cal grads that have gone on to become leaders in all fields is HUGE. There are more 1500+ SAT folks running around Cal than at many Ivy schools. Factor in the amazing grad students--whom you can easily get to know--and it is a great and happening social/intellectual environment.</p>
<p>My final word on this discussion: Berkeley used to be a great school, synonymous with Ivy League about 20 years ago. A lot of things have since changed ,such as ELC requirements almost guaranteeing entrance for students on GPA alone, flooding of community college students due to widespread knowledge of 'backdoors', loss of top professors to private schools etc. </p>
<p>Berkeley can't be seen as Ivy-caliber any longer, even though it has a good grad program. If you visit campus, you'll know that it is full of geeks and freaks, and is a totally opposite atmosphere to Ivy+SM schools I've seen. The fact that Berkeley only has 18 Nobel laureates to its credit compared to Stanford/Cornells 30 or so, despite being twice the size of those schools, tells you that there is a difference.</p>
<p>Berkeley is a great school for the money, but if price is not a consideration, then it slips below several schools.</p>
<p>"flooding of community college students due to widespread knowledge of 'backdoors' "</p>
<p>again that is overexaggerated. and community college students shouldnt be put down, i think almost everyone here on CC underestimates them. finally, this "backdoor" isnt always stable. its not like everyone in california wants to try the backdoor instead of going straight to college. in fact when i applied for college, our class was scared that the UC's wouldnt take CC transfers one day.</p>
<p>"Berkeley is a great school for the money, but if price is not a consideration, then it slips below several schools."
If Cornell cost half of what it does now, would its academic quality still be as good? Probably not. Endowments you say? Well then endowments will dry up faster. i dont think you can just simply delete the price factor of the equation so you can make the school thats more expensive look better.</p>
<p>Rooster:</p>
<p>how would you rate Cornell on your four criteria scale?</p>
<p>1) Prestige?<br>
2) Undergraduate class size?
3) Strength of student body (include Suny portion)
4) Residential (Ithaca has a lot of off campus housing projects)</p>
<p>Golubb:</p>
<p>ELC does not guarantee anyone into Berkeley or UCLA. It only guarantees kids acceptance into a UC, which this year, is Santa Barbara and Merced (I think). For many others kids at the bottom of the 12.5 hs class range, it means Riverside and Santa Cruz. </p>
<p>Let's not continue to bash community college kids. Yes, the competition is not the same as that of a four year univ, but I know of a many bright seniors this year (3.9 gpas and 1300's) that have chosen the jc route (didn't apply even to UC or CSU) only because they can't afford four years away at school. They'll work hard in the jc honors program, and transfer in where they'll only have two years out-of-pocket. Unfortunately, most in the world are not fotunate enought to pay full freight at a private school (as you indicate folks should), or even at a public school.</p>
<p>Even if Berkeley has slipped, and I'm not saying that is has, UCB and UCLA are the greatest buys out there for state residents. </p>
<p>TD: I know of kids that chose Berkeley over MIT bcos Berkeley had a broader base of availalble courses and departments in which to play. I know of another kid who could have been recruited by MIT, but he said absolutely no way - campus too "geeky"'. Yikes, so much for using a possible hook.</p>
<p>Misrepresentation of a school is not in anyone's best interests. I agree with Rooster when he says that Berkeley isn't the worst, but that it also isn't the best. It's a good school, but let's not portray it as something it is not. It is not as selective as the ivy-leagues, and 99% of Berkeley students either did not get into HYPSMC, or did not even apply. What makes it even worse is that Stanford is in close proximity, so top students don't even choose Berkeley for its location because they can always go to Stanford and have a top-of-the-line education AND stay close to home and experience the fun of San Francsico. Though I have respect for the school, it seems like Berkeley students are the future working class of society rather than the top leaders. The rampant grade deflation, cold and distant bureacracy, super large classes, and the general philosophy of the school seems to prepare students for the cubicle rather than for the executive's chair. I'm sure somebody will try to coutner my arguments and write down a whole list of Berkeley graduates who became CEO's and top leaders. But then again the University of Wisconsin- Madison has produced more CEO's than Harvard. That doesn't mean that Madison are Berkeley are successful just because they produced an impressive ABSOLUTE number of CEOs. When Harvard and Stanford only have 1600 students in the graduating class and Berkeley has 10,000 or so (i don't know the exact number but it's still much bigger than HYPS), absolute numbers mean nothing. You have to compare the PERCENTAGE of Berkeley students who ended up becoming influential leaders, and I think you will find that Berkeley's numbers don't match up well against the ivy-leagues at all. </p>
<p>This doesn't mean that Berkeley isn't a great school. Berkeley is a fine school. But I just don't think it is on the same level as Harvard, Stanford, MIT, and the rest of the ivy leagues. That's not meant to be a put down, but rather, meant to be the truth.</p>
<p>golubb_u:</p>
<p>UC Berkeley has 52 nobel laureates, not 18.
<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Nobel_laureates_associated_with_UC_Berkeley%5B/url%5D">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Nobel_laureates_associated_with_UC_Berkeley</a></p>
<p>It's a dumb way to gauge a school, anyway.</p>
<p>Berkeley still has around 200 members of the NAS--a number exceeded by only a couple of schools. For every famous prof that leaves another rises to the top.</p>
<p>UCLA has made more powerful faculty acquisitions over the last 10 years than any other law school in the Top 14. Since 1992, UCLA has acquired 5 young professors who are currently ranked in the Top 50 in terms of scholarly impact per citiation, including 3 in the Top 25 and one in the Top 10. The only school that comes close to matching these types of quality faculty acquisitions is Chicago, who acquired 4 profs in the Top 50, inclduing 2 in the Top 25 and 2 in the Top 10. </p>
<p><a href="http://www.utexas.edu/law/faculty/b...most_cited.html%5B/url%5D">http://www.utexas.edu/law/faculty/b...most_cited.html</a> </p>
<p>Furthermore, the acquisiting of 3 new tax profs has bumped UCLA's tax law program from #25 to #6 in the country. </p>
<p><a href="http://taxprof.typepad.com/taxprof_...cla_school.html%5B/url%5D">http://taxprof.typepad.com/taxprof_...cla_school.html</a> </p>
<p>Prof. Leiter has commented on some of UCLA's latest acquisitions, including the addition of Michael Schill as Dean (who came from NYU), stating that UCLA now has a "clear edge" over Duke, Cornell, NU, and USC in terms of faculty, and "may have a realistic shot at the top 10". </p>
<p><a href="http://leiterreports.typepad.com/bl...law_school.html%5B/url%5D">http://leiterreports.typepad.com/bl...law_school.html</a> </p>
<p>There are also rumors that Farber (an enviro-star at Boalt) might be migrating to UCLA, and that Nimmer might be assuming a full professorship teaching copyright next year.</p>
<p>gutrade - so far, I have an english teacher from Stanford and a piano teacher from stanford. Both of them tried to transfer to Berkeley but couldnt. Why did they want out? both of thme agreed that the Stanford atmosphere was quite pretentious and that the neighborhood that Stanford is in sucks monster balls. If you think that a lot of kids from Stanford go to SF, believe me, its not as easy as you think. Stanford is almost secluded from the neighborhood its in (you have to walk like 10 blocks just to get into Palo Alto). Truth be told, I wanted to go to Stanford and I was deferred, but the only reason I did want to go to Stanford was to get away from the university that is 2 blocks from my high school. But now, that i look back at it, i feel like a fool for almost selling out to a university that is hollow and aloof from civilization. It seems that on college confidential, everyone is quite pretentious and full of themselves. No one can seem to get past SAT averages or the fact that someone went to community college. My dad never went to college and he makes over 200,000 a year. Will the college that you go to determine the success? Yes, if your last name is Bush or Kennedy. But for everyone else, hard work at Cal State Chico (one of my friend's dad went to Cal State Chico for undergrad and got his MD from UPenn... and now owns a huge house and 4 BMWs) can be better than mediocrity at Harvard. And Gutrade, your comment of 99% of UCB students didnt get into an ivy is baseless. In one math class I took at UCB last semester, a lot of people I met turned down an ivy (and in several cases, it was Stanford Harvard or Yale). Hell, the two people that got into Stanford from a very elite private school a couple years ago(Miramonte) both decided to go to Berkeley. </p>
<p>Rooster - to compare UCB to UCD, USC and NYU and such is just a joke. UCB is still known internationally as one of the top universities (if we want to look at rankings... then we get #2 in England rankings, #4 in Shanghai rankings and easily top 3 in ranked departments.) Only people who think that they are high and mighty because they go to an ivy-league (ohhhhhhhhh) seem to try to always denounce Berkeley as third tier trash. </p>
<p>Go Bears! (UCB 41 Stanford 6.... chew on that for a while.. and anyone from the ivy league wanna play, bring it)</p>
<p>"Rooster - to compare UCB to UCD, USC and NYU and such is just a joke. UCB is still known internationally as one of the top universities (if we want to look at rankings... then we get #2 in England rankings, #4 in Shanghai rankings and easily top 3 in ranked departments.)"</p>
<p>Umm....Berkeley is more comparable to schools like UCD, USC, and NYU than to Harvard, Stanford, or MIT. It's funny how Berkeley people tend to accuse others of being elitist when in fact they are also eltist whenever they say things like "to compare UCB to UCD, USC and NYU and such is just a joke." Those schools are in fact very good schools and measure up to Berkeley quite well. On US News USC is ranked #30 and Berkeley is ranked #21. That's much closer to Berkeley than #1 ranked Princeton or #5 ranked MIT. And US News actually measures UNDERGRADUATE quality. That's why Berkeley's undergrad ranking is so low on US News but why Berkeley's graduate programs are so high on US News.</p>
<p>I wonder how many of these posters had arguments like, "my dad can beat up your dad," when they were kids. All of these schools have some great things to offer, and each under a microscope (or maybe a decent pair of glasses) has things that could be improved. I think an interested student could benefit from time spent at any of them and that which one would be the best for any individual is just a guess and subject to winds of luck and folly.</p>
<p>You know what, Mr. B, you are totally right. I'm going to stop trying to defend my beloved UC Berkeley (which I do not go to, and chances are I'm probably not going to end up there... unless its for grad school) simply because in the end, what matters most is the effort that you put into the school you go to. But i will never look down at a UCB diploma when compared to a Stanford or Harvard diploma.</p>
<p>I had several friends who knew each other for years and one day over coffee the question about our education came up, one of us was from Stanford, one from Berkely, I was from an Ivy and the fourth one went to a state school in the midwest. We had never noticed any evidence that any of us were smarter or more educated than the other. The nicest man I know didn't finish high school. He is living proof of the saying, "It is nice to be important, but it is more important to be nice."</p>
<p>"And US News actually measures UNDERGRADUATE quality."</p>
<p>really? </p>
<p>wow did they finally change their methodology to measure how good professors teach (and not just the % of classes under 20 or the student/faculty ratio)?</p>