<p>That guy was rejected by Berkeley at first. You can imagine that he was rejected by HYPS as well. </p>
<p>Anyway, the official statistics say that no more than 2 or three people choose Berkeley. How are you going to argue with cold hard facts? </p>
<p>Source: <a href="http://news-service.stanford.edu/news/2004/october6/decline-106.html%5B/url%5D">http://news-service.stanford.edu/news/2004/october6/decline-106.html</a></p>
<p>I passed up UCLA for Berkeley, even though UCLA offered me the chance to apply for the Honors Program. I've lived in SoCal for four years, and I am very ready to return to my home base. I also think Berkeley is an amazing town with tons of fascinating stuff going on.</p>
<p>wow that guy was like the top student when he graduated. how could berkeley not have noticed his potential?</p>
<p>They did when he appealed and submitted extra material. This is the strength of Berkeley. The top students are REALLY top.</p>
<p>irock1ce your location is hilarious... People's Republic of Berkeley... absolutely hilarious</p>
<p>They did when he appealed and submitted extra material. This is the strength of Berkeley. The top students are REALLY top.</p>
<p>What I mean is that he was rejected initially.</p>
<p>"Of the 821 students who declined admission and filled out a form that indicated where they were going instead..."</p>
<p>Not all the 821 filled out their forms it seems (preposition "of" gives it away); they don't give out the number who returned the decline form. Using 821 has the number won't reflect those who turned down Stanford for another university. Within those who didn't reply, there must be more students who opted for Ivies or other schools.</p>
<p>And the person who said that he knew many student who chose Cal over Stanford didn't say they were from the same class. They could've been students from different class levels (1st year, 2nd year, etc.) so it could be possible that he knows "several" though the validity we cannot check for sure; nonetheless, under the circumstances, calling him a liar seems too harsh for shaky evidence.</p>
<p>I know that, but I was using the laws of statistics and random samples. Obviously, when a news agency polls the public about which candidate they are going to vote for, they cannot possibly contact every person under the sun. They randomly poll people and use that statistic as a measure of the whole. The same goes for this example. Every applicant receives a reply card, and the people who return it is a random sample. So my bad, if it says only 8 people attend a pac-10 school, it could be 10 or maybe even 15 if you take the standard dev. But no more than 15, and we are talking about all pac 10 schools here not just Berkeley. The number who turn down Stanford for Berkeley cannot be more than 10, unless you stop believing in statistics.</p>
<p>ubermensch- you have posted the same post before. here is a rebuttal to your earlier post---
"übermensch: you're reading that wrong. When they say "no more than 1 percent indicated that they would attend a Pac-10 school", they mean that for each pac-10 school, up to 1% could have chosen to go there. Not that 1% represented the entirety of those who chose pac-10 schools. Up to 8 students may have gone to each Pac-10 school.
There are not 30% who declined stanford for non-Pac-10 schools.
People also do choose the cheaper UCs over UCLA, Berkeley and Stanford for money-matters, believe it or not."</p>
<p>this poster is right: economics plays a huge role in a student's choice of cal (or any other uc) over stanford (or an ivy). in my class, i know of three (there could be more) who are going to cal by declining johns hopkins, brown, and princeton, just because of the cost. their argument is that they will be getting a comparable or an even better education at cal at more than half the cost!
my friend gave up stanford for ucsd's bs/md program. i know of two other students (who are not in my school) who gave up stanford: one for northwestern's hpme and another for ucsd's bs/md medical scholars program. </p>
<p>believe it or not, people do choose other schools over stanford. some for money reasons, others for better programs elsewhere. its great that you have a lot of school pride for stanford. hopefully, it will serve you well.</p>
<p>Because of financial aid, the cost issue is moot. HYPS never make you pay more than the UCs unless you are filthy rich/comfortably middle class. </p>
<p>As to your remark that, "When they say "no more than 1 percent indicated that they would attend a Pac-10 school", they mean that for each pac-10 school, up to 1% could have chosen to go there. Not that 1% represented the entirety of those who chose pac-10 schools. Up to 8 students may have gone to each Pac-10 school."</p>
<p>I have to say that YOU are reading it wrong. No more than 1 percent chose to attend a pac-10 school. This does not mean that 1 percent chose to attend EACH Pac-10 school. It means 1 percent chose to attend one of the 10 pac-10 schools as a whole. WHich means, on average, 0.1 percent of students choose a particular pac-10 school over Stanford. That is an incredibly small number. </p>
<p>It's not like there are hundreds of students picking Berkeley over Stanford. Statisticaly speaking, there are only 65 cross-admits who choose Princeton over Stanford, and perhaps 2 or 3 who choose Berkeley over Stanford. Think about it, there are only 65 students who choose Princeton over Stanford, so what makes you think there would a substantial number choosing Berkeley? Since Princeton is a comparable school, and ony 65 cross-admits choose it, then Berkeley as a less prestigous school would attract even less cross-admits. 2 or 3 sounds just about right when you consider how much better Princeton is than Berkeley. </p>
<p>And no QTpie, I don't go to Stanford. I am just trying to give you guys some objective, statistical information that cannot be undermined by emotions and name-calling. No matter how many times people on this board can yell Stanford sucks and that Berkeley is "ranked #2 in the world," it cannot change the fact that almost nobody chooses Berkeley over HYPS statistically speaking. Not even for financial reasons. And that's an interesting fact to ponder.</p>
<p>And now all's quiet on the Berkeley front. Notice how even Westside and Gentlemanscholar cannot fight against pure, objective facts. Name calling won't fix this issue.</p>
<p>i think you need to get a life! you wile away your time essentially bashing berkeley and deluding yourself into thinking that less than a handful of students choose berkeley over stanford. it simply is not true. </p>
<p>i live in an upper middle class neighborhood, and money remains the biggest factor, especially in families with more than one child in college. ucb offers students a first class education at a prestigious institution at more than half the cost. </p>
<p>frankly, i think that both stanford and berkeley are great schools with their own strengths and weaknesses. it really is pointless to continue this discussion with you as you are obviously cemented to your dogmatic ways. and so am i!</p>
<p>best wishes to you!</p>
<p>ubermensch, </p>
<p>don't know where you got your statistics, but don't believe everything you read! Statistics can be manipulated to say anything you want. My D chose Reed over Stanford. It all comes down to fit.</p>
<p>Ubermensch, students who have been to both Stanfurd and Berkeley, say that they enjoyed their time at Berkeley better. </p>
<p>Top students at Berkeley and Stanfurd are the exact same. I hate to sound arrogant, but I have not seen anyone at Stanfurd who is smarter than the people I know at Berkeley. In my opinion, Berkeley students outperform their Stanfurd peers in investment banking and consulting after graduating. </p>
<p>Regardless, at one point in time, Berkeley was seriously challenging Harvard for the number one spot in the 70's and 80's. No one really made public vs. private distinctions as they do now. It is obvious to me that Berkeley presents enough of a threat to privates where people who do not even attend either HYS or Berkeley try to make this case that all privates are better than all publics, just so that their not so good private school can have a better name. </p>
<p>The reality is that the new paradigm is about tech, research, and sciences. The new vanguard of education is Berkeley, Cal Tech, UCSF, MIT, Stanfurd, UCLA, UT Austin, U Michigan, Cornell, UCSD. Schools that have the best sciences in America, period. </p>
<p>Its about tech, research, progress, departmental strengths. That is the new paradigm if America is to succeed in fending off the rest of the world, so I suggest you get used to it.</p>
<p>"Of the 821 students who declined admission...28 percent said Harvard, 20 percent said Yale, 13 percent said MIT and 8 percent said Princeton. All other universities that were mentioned did not represent more than 2 percent, and no more than 1 percent indicated that they would attend a Pac-10 school, according to the figures provided by the admission office."</p>
<p>Ubermensch,
I believe you are misreading this.</p>
<p>Note that 28% + 20% + 13% + 8% = 69%
That means, 31% attend a different institution.</p>
<p>But the very next line says: "All other universities that were mentioned did not represent more than 2 percent, and no more than 1 percent indicated they would attend a Pac 10 school..."</p>
<p>This CANNOT mean "... not represent more than 2% [TOTAL], and no more than 1% [TOTAL] indicated they would attend a Pac 10 school..."
The numbers just don't add up.</p>
<p>Clearly, they must mean: "All other universities that were mentioned did not represent more than 2% [EACH], and no more than 1 percent [EACH] indicated they would attend a Pac 10 school..."</p>
<p>Otherwise, it doesn't make sense. I note that it isn't necessarily your fault... whoever wrote the article did a poor job with writing clearly.</p>
<p>"don't know where you got your statistics, but don't believe everything you read! Statistics can be manipulated to say anything you want."</p>
<p>I got my statistics directly from this source, which ALL of you are welcome to check out:
<a href="http://news-service.stanford.edu/news/2004/october6/decline-106.html%5B/url%5D">http://news-service.stanford.edu/news/2004/october6/decline-106.html</a></p>
<p>These statistics are neither biased nor manipulated, because I am not skewing some pie chart or tinkering with a histogram here--I am giving you the cold, hard, unadulterated numbers. Saying that my statistic is manipulated doesn't make any sense. If I told you that there are 22 people in my class, there are no if and or buts about it. There are 22 people in my class. When I tell you that no more than 2 or 3 students choose Berkeley over Stanford per year, there is no way i can manipulate that statistic. Only 2 or 3, and maybe zero students per year choose Berkeley over Stanford. Shocking yes, but considering that only 65 choose an equally prestigious peer like Princeton, why should more than 2 or 3 pick a much less prestigious school like Berkeley? Need I remind you that Princeton offers a no-loans, 100 percent gift aid policy. </p>
<p>Anyway Westside, although you can offer an emotional, purely anecdotal evidence about why you think Berkeley is better than Stanford, I have the damning statistic that virtually nobody chooses Berkeley over Stanford. The only schools students do pick in significant numbers are Harvard, Yale, MIT, and Princeton. I'll bet you that the 31 percent in the "other" schools category go to the lesser Ivies. A significant number probably go to a college that offered a full ride. In the end, virtually nobody picks Berkeley. So for all the posts on this board in which people claim they know "several people" who chose Berkeley over Stanford for financial reasons or atmosphere, either those people they know are the only ones, period, who have made such a decision, or they are lying. In either case, I must admit that I too thought maybe 10 or 12 people chose Berkeley over Stanford rather than just 2 or 3. The possibility that not a single person chooses Berkeley never crossed my mind, but that possibility is more likely than you think.</p>
<p>^ Things change all the time. It wasn't like that 20 years ago. Stanfurd probably tried harder back then because its difficult to lose in both location and academics. </p>
<p>Things are bound to change at any time.</p>
<p>"This CANNOT mean "... not represent more than 2% [TOTAL], and no more than 1% [TOTAL] indicated they would attend a Pac 10 school..."
The numbers just don't add up.</p>
<p>Clearly, they must mean: "All other universities that were mentioned did not represent more than 2% [EACH], and no more than 1 percent [EACH] indicated they would attend a Pac 10 school..."</p>
<p>Okay, assuming that you are correct, then 1 percent attended each Pac-10 school. I don't neessarily agree with that, but for the sake of argument, let's say you are right. Then in total, no more than 8 people attended Berkeley. That's still a very small number, and since it says no more than 1 percent, it could be anywhere from 0 to 8 and is probably around 3 or 4.</p>
<p>^ Most students don't claim that they would have picked Berkeley over Stanfurd. But Berkeley students know that their quality level is the same as Stanfurd students if not better by graduation end because of the greater work ethic and superior professors. </p>
<p>However, saying that Berkeley is not as good if not better than UPenn, Brown, Cornell is a completely different matter though. </p>
<p>The difference is that the person you are when you enter Berkeley vs. when you leave, you are transformed into a completely different person. And this different harder working, more global person with a superior & progressive view of the world is greater than what Stanfurd produces. Thats the difference.</p>
<p>Depending on how they round-off, it could be as high as 12...
I wouldn't be suprised by a dozen or so kids turning down Stanford for Berkeley and a dozen or so for UCLA... and then much less at the rest of the Pac-10 (for example, I'd be willing to bet no one turned down Stanford for Oregon State... Clearly, Berkeley is a HECK OF A LOT closer to Stanford than it is to Oregon State.)</p>
<p>But, we don't have the detailed numbers, so there is absolutely no point in speculating any further.</p>
<p>Interesting that CalTech also falls into the no more than 2% category.
That is a little surprising.</p>