Cal Poly is Top Choice for Top Students

<p>do you know what peer assessment is?</p>

<p>It's when students rate their own schools. That means if kids love their schools, they'll give it high scores. It's a very biased system of ranking that really doesn't reflect the quality of education. If peer assessment was the main way schools get ranked, USC would be on top of that List. Not Stanford. Not Berkeley. Not MIT. Not Harvard. But hey, if you think Cal Poly engineering isn't much of a stretch from UCLA's, then dude..what ever floats your boat. lol. Just know that when you step into industry, UCLA graduates will be your competition as well. But Thank You, for Englightening my day. You've made it very bright.</p>

<p>"Peer Assessment. How the school is regarded by administrators at peer institutions. A school's peer assessment score is determined by surveying the presidents, provosts, and deans of admissions (or equivalent positions) at institutions in the school's category. Each individual was asked to rate peer schools' undergraduate academic programs on a scale from 1 (marginal) to 5 (distinguished)."</p>

<p>Thanks to USNews.</p>

<p>And from what my dad see's in his work as an electrical engineer who works with UCLA, MIT, and quite a few Cal Poly grads, the Cal Poly grads are very competent and brilliant workers straight from school.</p>

<p>Why is it that UCLA has much fewer units than Cal Poly when it comes to graduation? Because Cal Poly puts emphasis in labs. I don't know about you, but a company would rather have a fresh graduate who has hands on experience on real applications than a graduate who only has book knowledge but no experience. I'm sorry, but thats how it is comparing UCLA graduates to Cal Poly graduates. I still don't understand how one can learn with such a high student to professor ratio or being in a classroom with a bunch of TAs. There is no TA in Cal Poly, and professors are very accessible. Thats true education there.</p>

<p>On another note, Peer assesment is very accurate. Most college students surveyed have one priority in mind. That is quality of education and confidence in their education. Obviously Cal Poly students are confident in the courses and instruction they recieve. USNews is very respectable when it comes to ranking, because their rankings actually do reflect how well a university is. Its not made up stuff. The fact, that they use peer assesment as one of their big factors is proof that peer assesment is very accurate. Go ahead and call it false, but USNews rankings was composed very well and is considered a standard by many for a reason.</p>

<p>I choose poly over berkeley, ucla, ucsd and others... no financial problems or anything..my decision was based on the engineering school and area</p>

<p>It would've been more practical for me to choose either UCLA or UCSD (most of my friends are going to either one and both are closer to home), but SLO won me over because of the school's atmosphere and its engineering department. I'm confident that I made the right choice.</p>

<p>How about Business? I didn't have much of a choice. UC Davis and UC Irvine don't really have a Business program, so I had to choose Cal Poly. But I still think Cal Poly is just as good as Davis and Irvine.</p>

<p>I still believe the misconception typical of a misinformed admitted UC applicant is that Cal Poly is inferior only because of the fallacy that it is part of the CSU system and does not offer PHD's.</p>

<p>In that case I would choose UC Merced over Harvey-Mudd, Cooper Union, or any of the academies just because they offer inferior education due to the sole fact they are not part of the UC system nor do they offer PHD's.</p>

<p>Does not make sense right? Thats right.</p>

<p>no, to me it was the admission status: percent admitted and mean grades & test scores. Whats your gpa/class rank/SAT scores?. Thats right.</p>

<p>Merced is just....Merced...Bluntly speaking, it's in the middle of nowhere and has nothing much going on for it. Even Riverside has some sweet med programs with UCLA but even then... Yeah, Cal Poly's engineering is pretty well known in CA, so unless ur aiming for grad school, Cal Poly is a clear choice there. but...</p>

<p>CSU, in general, is on a lower level than UC, so even if you can consider Cal Poly the "Berkeley" of the CSU, it's still no Berkeley. not almost. not close. It's not even near Berkeley's league. Four, six, 10 years from now, you're looking for a job and you tell your boss who's interviewing you, "Hey, I''m a UC Berkeley alumni." He'll probably say, "Wow! Really!? That's awesome! me too! When can you start?" On the other hand, if you say, "Hey, I graduated from Cal Poly," he'll probably say "oh, that's not bad. We'll let you know in a few days."</p>

<p>My Point:I'm not saying Cal Poly is a bad school. It owns the pants off of at least half the other schools in America. But that article, "Cal Poly is Top Choice for Top Students," is purposely misleading. I gotta admit I doubt the veracity of the statistics at first, but even if they are true, you gotta consider that they are biased, misleading, and do not nearly reflect the statistics as a whole. Comparing Cal Poly to Irvine and Santa Barbara, sure that's reasonably comparable, depending on your career and educational goals. </p>

<p>But Comparing Cal Poly to Berkeley, LA, and SD, especially for engineering, is wayyy wayyy wayy b/s. That's so ridiculous that whoever says that will instantly lose credibility. Some of you guys argue that companies prefer hiring Cal Poly engineering grads over UCLA grads. Okay, true, Maybe sometimes. But in those cases, I'll be it's because they're looking for people to fill in operator positions, not engineers. Either that or theres another economy boon in California, or the company has some b/s policies like JDSU does. </p>

<p>But especially now when America's little "bubble" bursts, if you're thinking a Cal Poly engineer graduate will make as much as a UCBerkeley graduate, then dream on. okay. I'm sorry if you guys might find this offensive, but I'm just being realistic.</p>

<p>Edit: Oh, btw, lets look at endowment. Cal poly?? $123,744,477. Berkeley?? $2 Billion. ooo UCLA? $1.7 Billion. Endowment reflects how well alumni does as well. I guess you guys could argue that since Cal Poly doesn't offer Ph.D's, it doesn't get as many successful alumni. okay. true. but that still doesn't change the fact that UC's have a lot more money to direct into their facilities, and especially with majors like engineering, there are a lot of expensive equipment. As for Cal Poly, where are they going to get the lastest in technology? Students' tuitions? The Government? LoL don't make me laugh.</p>

<p>Actually Cal Poly's Centennial Campaign netted about $264.4M from companies/alumni, so there is money at the campus. There is construction happening all over the campus with an emphasis in getting top notch facilities and technology. Currently under construction or almost there: 2 new engineering buildings, new construction management building, Center for Science and Math, new library, and a new football stadium. As for GPA/SAT, CP's last year was 3.9 and 1240. Those are top students IMO. Cal Poly is on the rise, and the degree will be worth more in 10 years. It wasn't nearly as selective in the 90's as it is now, and has a ton more money. It even gained its own pier in 2002 at Avila Beach for biological science research. That said, I would still go to berkeley over poly.</p>

<p><a href="http://giving.calpoly.edu/%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://giving.calpoly.edu/&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

<p>"That's so ridiculous that whoever says that will instantly lose credibility."</p>

<p>I think school admins are pretty credible. </p>

<p>"Wow! Really!? That's awesome! me too! When can you start?"</p>

<p>That's what the CEO of Raytheon would say if he heard you were a cal poly grad.</p>

<p>"Edit: Oh, btw, lets look at endowment. Cal poly?? $123,744,477. Berkeley?? $2 Billion. ooo UCLA? $1.7 Billion. Endowment reflects how well alumni does as well. I guess you guys could argue that since Cal Poly doesn't offer Ph.D's, it doesn't get as many successful alumni. okay. true. but that still doesn't change the fact that UC's have a lot more money to direct into their facilities, and especially with majors like engineering, there are a lot of expensive equipment. As for Cal Poly, where are they going to get the lastest in technology? Students' tuitions? The Government? LoL don't make me laugh."</p>

<p>Endowment is very very very misleading. Not only does Berkeley fund much much more majors than Cal Poly (let us remember Cal Poly focuses on Business, Agriculture, Architecture, and Engineering), have graduate degrees, but also funds massive research. Cal Poly is not a PHD or Research school. It would never recieve the endowment of Berkeley because 1) it does not even have the amount of students berkeley has, thus it does not need as much professors to pay for (though the ratio of prof. to students is still better than berkeley's), 2) it will not recieve government fund compared to Berkeley because it does not do the high amount of costly research in all fields, especially medical research, 3) it does not offer other big major fields, such as medical degrees, which decreases the number of students the campus holds and attracts, which also effect how much the government needs to fund the university, 4) it does not give out PHD's which itself would account for a large endowment from government fund, and tuition.</p>

<p>Yes in general CSU is supposed to be lower than UC, but that was when the system was created. The system now, is far from what it used to be.</p>

<p>However, you have not visited the CP Engineering labs, or architecture labs. I've seen the UCSB engineering labs as well as CP's and I can say CP offers much more equipment for undergrads. Sure PHD level education in UCSB use the high tech equipment, but not undergrads like CP does. CP has ALOT, and I do mean ALOT of high tech equipment. It is the reason why CP has more labs and more units required to graduate compared to UCLA. Okay so UCSB is not berkeley or UCLA, but they do recieve a large endowment that is comparable to UCLA and Berkeley. Simply, that endowment must go to the flowers, athsetics of the campus, PHDs, and research, because I do not see it in the undergraduate education. Well I heard UCLA has the best food available, endowment must go there, oh and the crowded dorms, endowment must be going in building a large new dormatory or suit, that costs alot especially here in LA. UC has alot to spend for endowment, that by the time that goes to specific departments, that amount I am sure of, is less than the individual departments CP recieve.</p>

<p>By the way 1 engineering building is just being built/renovated (not sure), another huge engineering building is in the process of being created, a new building for the architecture department is being created. CP is doing all this, while the campus itself all ready has high tech and more than sufficient space. The campus itself is not overloaded with 18,000 students. These new facilities are built to help with the master plan of increasing student load to 20,000 students. But, that increase is to be allowed in a span of 10 years. Definately, CP wants to keep a great prof to student ratio and attention to each individual students, unlike Berkeley.</p>

<p>"It's not even near Berkeley's league. Four, six, 10 years from now, you're looking for a job and you tell your boss who's interviewing you, "Hey, I''m a UC Berkeley alumni." He'll probably say, "Wow! Really!? That's awesome! me too! When can you start?" On the other hand, if you say, "Hey, I graduated from Cal Poly," he'll probably say "oh, that's not bad. We'll let you know in a few days.""</p>

<p>Cal Poly will never have the recognition of league of berkeley. However, one needs to analyze carefully why that is. Again, we do not do research and we do not give out PHD's. Berkeley recieves its name from its research and PHDs, however, its undergrad does not have that reputation. Twilight, have you gone to the open house of Cal Poly? I have visited UCLA, and have quite a few freshman friends there as well as family who have graduated there who believe the cal poly program for engineering is much better. (most of my family or engineering or medical majors). Being in southern california, in LA, where I have numerous numerous sources who got to UCLA, I can say that the amount of attention, to your education you recieve in such a big PHS/Research University such as berkeley and UCLA is substantially poor compared to the attention and small class size recieved at Cal Poly.</p>

<p>I believe, UCLA and Berkeley, have the same reputation for their type of undergraduate education. If this be the case, than Berkeley, has a degraded undergraduate education compared to cal poly. This is a very bold statement, but not as bold as your statement. There is clear understanding of this between engineering students at Berkeley, UCLA, and CP, students whove seen each other's program that is. There may be diffrences in opinion in which is the best, but all would agree that CP, Berkeley, and UCLA are pretty even in undergraduate education. CP has a limited number of majors, but the campus is devoted itself to these few majors. The only ones valid to make and arguable point are students, alumni, and prof. of these universities who know about each others program. I speak from the viewpoint of UCLA and CP students that I have spoken to in each university's college of engineering. Who have you spoken to in both campuses? Have you visited both campuses? Have you seen both programs? I have for CP and UCLA.</p>

<p>"My Point:I'm not saying Cal Poly is a bad school. It owns the pants off of at least half the other schools in America. But that article, "Cal Poly is Top Choice for Top Students," is purposely misleading. I gotta admit I doubt the veracity of the statistics at first, but even if they are true, you gotta consider that they are biased, misleading, and do not nearly reflect the statistics as a whole. Comparing Cal Poly to Irvine and Santa Barbara, sure that's reasonably comparable, depending on your career and educational goals."</p>

<p>Simply put, that statistic is what it is. The statistic of admitted students to Cal Poly who applied to Cal Poly and were admitted and also another UC campus and were admitted there as well for the year 2001. As reputation for CP increases, the percentage as well is likely to increase. I do not see how the statistic is misleading? Possible factors I am trying to see from your point of view rather than being full out biased as you are is that it does not report the amount of admitted CP students who were admitted to more than one UC Campus. Therefore we can hypothesize that if 100% of the 40% who chose Cal Poly over UCLA or 122 students, could have also applied to other UC campus', increasing the percentage of other UC Campus' who rejected that UC for CP. However, thats assuming 100% of each student from each UC campus was indeed accepted at each UC or applied to that UC.</p>

<p>However, the statistic is what it is. With the high amount of percentage of CP admits choosing CP over the UC campuses, but such a small number compared to UC admits overall, it does hint that students familiar with the CP way of education, putting name aside, believe that CP offers a much better education for price and location.</p>

<p>"But Comparing Cal Poly to Berkeley, LA, and SD, especially for engineering, is wayyy wayyy wayy b/s. That's so ridiculous that whoever says that will instantly lose credibility. Some of you guys argue that companies prefer hiring Cal Poly engineering grads over UCLA grads. Okay, true, Maybe sometimes."</p>

<p>I'm sorry but thats just b/s. Do me a favor, call Intel, Northrup Grumman, NASA, CISCO, Microsoft, any major airline company, or any major engineering company. Ask them who would they pick, a Cal Poly undergraduate or Berkeley undergraduate, who both have the same work experience, talent, etc... Chances are, if it came down to a temporary internship to see which students is more competant, they would pick the CP undergraduate because of his practical knowledge rather than theoretical knowledge.</p>

<p>In engineering and architecture, the undergraduate education is better than berkeley hands down. The professors admit it, I believe professors who are very well educated, themselves have much much much more credibility than you, a high school senior about to graduate. Though I myself am in your position, atleast my views and statement are not stated without clarification or word from Prof, students, and those in the work industry. </p>

<p>Twilightzer, talk to some CP alumni, professors, or something. It's the only way to know how education is at CP. I'm in Electrical Engineering.
Michael M. Cirovic Is the Chair of that department in CP.<br>
His number is (805)756-2781. I'm not sure of his open hours to students, but each prof in CP has open hours, they are very accessible. Talk to him, ask him questions, be straightforward. I do not believe the chairs of departments are this devoted to students (to be able to speak to them, let alone admitted or people like you) at Berkeley as they are in CP.</p>

<p>Go by fact and experience of others, not by fallacy of name.
I'd rather focus on the quality of education I recieve, rather than
how fancy my diploma looks. After all, a name of the university carries
you in the begining, but what you know and learn carries you through life.
I believe CP has a name, but for sure CP does a better job at teaching.</p>

<p>Cal Poly grads:
<a href="http://www.careerservices.calpoly.edu/gsr/04-05/gsr2004-2005.pdf%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.careerservices.calpoly.edu/gsr/04-05/gsr2004-2005.pdf&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

<p>Berkeley grads:
<a href="http://career.berkeley.edu/CarDest/2004Majors.stm%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://career.berkeley.edu/CarDest/2004Majors.stm&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

<p>Civil Engineering majors from both schools with B.S. make 50k (median).</p>

<p>"...if you're thinking a Cal Poly engineer graduate will make as much as a UCBerkeley graduate, then dream on."</p>

<p>Maybe prior research would help your arguments?</p>

<p>Cal polys sweet - so is Berkeley. I would like to go to Berkeley for grad after CP, I just didnt want to be engulfed in Berkeley the society as an undergrad - cal polys more my style.</p>

<p>how hard would that be?</p>

<p>Sounds like a good plan. However if you make it into the honors program for engineering, most departments have a 4+1 program where you earn you bs and ms in just 5 years. Going to Berkeley after CP would be 4 + 2 years.</p>

<p>Do Berkeley's BS/MS degree program for EECS. 5 years. B.S. and M.S. degrees. After a masters in science from Berkeley, the Nobel Laureate professors would love to take you as a Ph.D student. That's three more years (or two if you're real good) for Ph.D. Get that Doctor of Philosophy from Berkeley and you'll get respect anywhere you go. Well maybe not at Cal Poly, cause they think their BS is better than Berkeley's Bachelor of Science for EECS, but for the rest of the world Berkeley's good enough kiddies. (Oh, and that 4 extra years of pay you'll be getting with that CalPoly BS, you'll make it up in about three years after that Ph.D)</p>

<p>Twilighterz I don't know what your problem with Cal Poly is. In fact, we do not DISS or Insult Berkeley at all. We do know berkeley is highly reputed. Our point is to get it clear to your head that Cal Poly is just as a great education as Berkeley in the fields of architecture and engineering.</p>

<p>Now... a BS/MS program at cal poly in 5 years or 4+1 would be good as it gives the student a very personalized, highly lab and hands on oriented, and special attention education compared to a big doctoral and research based university. </p>

<p>If that person decides to pursue a career after that, his knowlege and degree will carry him far as is a degree from berkeley, but with an advantage of hands on learning.</p>

<p>If he wishes to pursue a phd. Then I am sure Berkeley, or even Cal Tech/MIT, would be a great university to attend. Where the focus in those university is doctoral degrees, where he will definately be taught by the Nobel Laureate professors in the university, unlike undergraduate students.
Yes that 4... actually 3 years (if he does the 4+1 program in CP), will make up that pay he'll get from CP. But then again money saved going to CP the first 5 years will definately help pay for the next 3 year Berkeley or other highly reputed universities.</p>

<p>Twilighterz0, First you attack the ability to get a job and high salary with a CP degree. There is legitimate proof that you are wrong.
Next, you are using the fact that CP does not have Nobel Laureate Professors, when you fail to note that most undergraduate students do not even recieve instruction from Nobel Laureate Professors unless it is a small specialized university such as MIT/Cal Tech or if your a graduate student. Keep in mind, the Professors in Berkeley became Nobel prize winners because of their research, unfortunately there is no nobel prize for producing great students.</p>

<p>What else is to attack? The campus on food? Okay you win there.</p>

<p>Justsomeboi, you're wrong about architecture. Cal Poly's program is ranked 2nd in the nation, above Berkeley's program. That's what Cal Poly is known for (well, that and engineering).</p>

<p>twilightzer0, both Berkeley and Cal Poly SLO are excellent schools. It just depends on what you want out of your undergraduate experience. Whereas Cal Poly focuses on preparing its students for the work force, Berkeley prepares its students for graduate school. You really can't go wrong with either though.</p>

<p>Cal Poly is a great school to go to IF your planning to join the workforce after recieving a B.S. or B.A. degree, especially in the areas of Engineering and Architecture. </p>

<p>"Our point is to get it clear to your head that Cal Poly is just as a great education as Berkeley in the fields of architecture and engineering."</p>

<p>That's what I'm attacking all along Justsomeboi. While Cal Poly is a great school for preparing you for the workforce (I respect how some people may choose to work after their bachelors as opposed to pursueing grad school, hey, to each his own), don't you think it's a bit Delusional to say Cal Poly's Engineering is as great as Cal's? First of all, they're not very comparable in that one prepares you for the workforce, while the other prepares you for higher education. Secondly, overall Berkeley's undergrad Engineering is ranked 2nd in the nation. It's one of the Big Three in engineering (along with Stanford and MIT). When Berkeley got ranked, it got ranked with the schools that offer docterate degrees (hence, Ivy and Ivy-like schools), meaning it's being compared with Harvard, Yale, MIT, Stanford, and Princeton, just to name a few. When US news ranks Cal Poly, it ranks it with the universities whose highest degree is a bachelor's or master's and even then it's not in the top three (Rose-Hulman inst of tech, Harvey Mudd, Cooper Union).</p>

<p>It goes with the same reasons that I refute Irg&nchrg's argument that Cal Poly's architecture is ranked above Berkeley's. They just weren't ranked on the same scale. So unless you argue that Cal Poly pwns the Ivy League, you can't say Cal Poly is better/as great as Cal. </p>

<p>As for the professors, I'm not sure about Cal, but at UCLA, All professors, including nobel laureates, are required by university policy to teach undergrad classes. While it's still unlikely that you'll get a class taught by a nobel laureate, it's that possibility that if you have a real "go-getter" attitude that you can become associated with these great men. Also, while it's true that nobel laureates may make crappy teachers, what you really want them for is for their unique ways of thinking. They percieve things differently than the average man, a kind of not afraid to think outside the box thing, and it's That teaching that is truely invaluable.</p>

<p>However, once again I agree that Cal Poly is a great school in how they prepare you for the Workforce (this is not the same as preparing you for higher education), so yes, as Irg&nchrg have said, it does truely depend on what you want out of your undergrad experience, and what you want out of life.</p>

<p>Cal Poly's architecture was ranked by Intellidesign above Berkeley's. I believe Poly is second only after Brown (I forget). I'll try to dig out the rankings when i have time.</p>