<p>I think Columbia is gonna cost me around 15k to 20k extra a year, which adds up to around 60-80k over 4 years. Is it worth paying this much more money, esp if its gonna be all in loans? I plan on attending law school about a year or two after i graduate college and I am planning on majoring in history. Columbia has given me an EFC of 32k, from which im hoping they will lower to get close to my other schools EFC (27k, 29k)</p>
<p>by "is it worth it" i mean anything and everything</p>
<p>is the whole 'who you rub shoulders with" thing true?
Will law schools treat a UPenn grad and Berk grad much differently?
Is the education much different?</p>
<p>(Im weighing UCLA and Berk almost equally btw, so you can replace Berk with UCLA)</p>
<p>and p.s. I posted the exact same thread on the UPenn post.</p>
<p>Berkeley seems like such a miserable place to attend college -- huge classes, profs wanting nothing to do with undergrads, triple dorm rooms, not getting housing after 1-2 years, etc. The college experience itself is worth something, and probably worth more than the long-term benefits.</p>
<p>Not true about Berkeley. It can be a wonderful experience. Its campus is many times the size, it is parklike, the weather is temperate and gentle, it is a calm and pleasant town -- not hectic like NY, yet is near SF and all kinds of cultural activities. On the west coast it is at least as prestigious as Columbia, if not more. The price can't be beat for a Californian.</p>
<p>Though as an HLS admit I should probably be encouraging circulation of that list as a measure of prestige, it's not really valid in this case especially.
In terms of "global prestige", the JD is a poor measure - it's a very American degree, and international students usually attend American law schools for an LLM after receiving an undergrad law degree. Hence the fact there are only two students from Oxford. What's more, there's question of whether law school admit stats confer prestige at all; the fact that fewer students from one school opt for law school proportionally less than those from another would skew the statistics against the second school, which may be more selective/better perceived, etc.</p>
<p>Berekely is actually regarded to be must more prestigious overseas rather than in US. But in the end, if you can afford it- a Columbia degree and education will pay dividends over a Berkeley degree.</p>
<p>"Though as an HLS admit I should probably be encouraging circulation of that list as a measure of prestige, it's not really valid in this case especially."</p>
<p>Holy crap, you made it into HLS? Congrats man.</p>
<p>From what I hear and know, Berkeley is best experienced as a grad student. Then again, so might be Columbia...but the disparity between undergraduate and graduate experiences in the latter case may not be as great.</p>
<p>Personally I would go to UC Berkeley if the cost is 20K lower per year compared to attedning Columbia.</p>
<p>Berkeley is more famous world wide. In Enrope, England ranks Berkeley #2 only second to Harvard. In Asia, Berkeley is ranked #4. The Newsweek International ranks Berkeley #5 globally and with Columbia at #10. For graduate education, Berkeley is ranked #1 overall by National Research Council. </p>
<p>Like Columbia, Berkeley also has many top notch faculty members, many Nobel price winners, excellent learning and research facilities that seniors can benefit from before heading to a quality graduate program, exciting campus atmosphere, and well balanced college life with PAC-10 athletic programs (NCAA dividion I) and so on. You will get excellent education and exciting life experience that you won't get from most private universities with just smaller class size.</p>
<p>The Wheather in Northern Califonia is also great with temperatire in 55 -75 F year around with lots of outdoor activities. I would use the money I save to buy a BMW and frive around the west coast ...</p>
<p>Don't read into too much about US news and world report ranking. Personally I think the ranking is very bias because it primarily focuses on strength of private schools. </p>
<p>Generally, Berkeley tends to be more prestigious in Asia and Columbia is more well-known in Europe. Phelps was in our news quite a lot, which really pushed CU's prestige in Europe. It just kinda depends on what type of person you are.</p>
<p>The Newsweek and other international rankings usually lean way too heavily on publications and scientific research achievements. Anyone who wants to know how the schools compare in fields outside the sciences, or for undergraduates in general, shouldn't bother with them. If anything they're in inverse proportion to the degree of time and attention undergrads receive...</p>
<p>There is no question in my mind that you can get an equally great education at Berkeley and Columbia. If you are a top student at Cal, you will get into a top lawschool as well. There are two questions only you can answer:</p>
<ol>
<li><p>How significant is it to you to save $20,000 a year given that you are planning on law school as opposed to graduate school where you might be supported? You might think about the likelihood that you'll need to take large loans in law school, and how that might narrow some of the choices you might have in choosing your legal field and first jobs. Expenses at Columbia go beyond tuition (though that apparently is going up more than 6% next year, so you should consider yearly increases as well as current costs.) There are travel expenses to and from California, and the fact that NYC is a very expensive place to have fun. Funny you should mention a Beamer, because I always joke that our son's Columbia tuition is like buying a BMW and driving it off a cliff every year.</p></li>
<li><p>What kind of person and learner are you? Berkeley is a very exciting place. Its size means not only a huge number of extra curricular opportunities and variety of people, but also a much larger course offering because of the size of the faculty. Berkeley's faculty has an excellence across the board that rivals Harvard's -- which says nothing about undergraduate teaching, of course. UC's have what is probably the best education abroad program in the country -- the possibility of studying in one of about 30 countries -- at the cost of UC tuition. Are you thinking of study abroad? How about the possibility that you might like to take more than four years to figure out what you want to do? </p></li>
</ol>
<p>The downside of the size of course, is that it can be overwhelming, depending on your personality. But if you choose to major in a large department at Columbia you will also need to be aggressive to know profs and to get information. Columbia is not known for its advising. It demands more independence of its students than many of the other Ivies and certainly than an LAC. (To gather more information, besides talking to students, you might look up some specific courses in your intended major and see how large the upper division classes are at Columbia vs Cal.)</p>
<p>There will be a broader range of students at Cal than at Columbia. You will find plenty of really smart kids, but there will also be plenty of graduates of lousy California public schools. As for the question about rubbing shoulders -- meaning networking -- if you intend to go to law school, that is where you will do your networking. But, if you intend to spend your professional life in California, you will find a much larger Cal network than Columbia one, of course, while the opposite is true on the East Coast.</p>
<p>There are many aspects of Columbia that are great, of course: NYC and the experience of another part of the country, the core curriculum if it appeals to you, four years of university-provided housing. Only you can judge how much that's worth in the long-run. Hope that helps you frame some questions.</p>
<p>It's true that Columbia leaves a lot up to the individual student's initiative, but my son has found the faculty to be pretty appproachable; he has had a lot more contact with the faculty than the Berkeley undergrads I've met.</p>
<p>Glad to hear that. I think it depends in part on the department, both places. I think a student who is uncomfortable approaching profs should not assume that Columbia is a place where profs reach out to students, and a student who is comfortable taking the initiative can probably get some response both places. My daughter went to UCLA in a department where most of her classes were capped at 17. There are opportunities everywhere, and my general philosophy is that a student should choose a college based on where he or she is best temperamentally suited to find and take advantage of the opportunities.</p>
<p>crap i just posted this post and it didnt get posted</p>
<p>let me try again</p>
<p>i have to say. these posts are INCREEDIBLY helpful
you guys seriuosly dont have any ide ahow much you guys are influencing my life right now. speical thanks to SAC and NY5045, althougth you guys are all great.</p>
<p>ok back to business</p>
<p>i would love the experience of NYC, esp since i live an hour away from berk. but... i would feel guilty making my parents pay an extra 15-20k (in loans to be paid back with interest) a year for an "Experience"</p>
<p>another thing. i thougth study abroad would be a big columbia plus over berk. sac mentioned something to the ctonrary. more info?</p>