Don't you think it would be better for the CAL Colleges to separate ways?

Colleges and Universities A-Z University of California - Berkeley
101

<p>
[quote]
greatestyen
Junior Member</p>

<p>I'm not too sure about this. As a Berkeley undergraduate student, I have many friends in Berkeley's grad schools who graduated from Harvard College. Their assessment? Harvard undergraduate education "sucks." The way they make it sound-Harvard College is essentially a big rat race to get professors' attention. Now, since profs "pretty much know" that they're dealing with "the smartest group of 17-24 year olds on the planet," they will often make themselves unavailable. Getting a personal attention (essential for good recommendations) at Harvard is one of the biggest hassles a student can go through, it seems. Harvard students, according to my grad school friends, not only have to be brilliant but they have to sabotage their peers. This can involve anything from misshelving prof-assigned library books to spilling drinks on a dormmates' homework. This rarely happens at Berkeley. My conclusion from these anecdotes has been that, in essense, Berkley's faculty, as a whole, has the "Harvard brains" without the attitude. Since this faculty is accessible to all Berkeley undergrad who seek them out-I'm not too sure if Harvard offers the best undergrad "education." What it DOES provide is the best opportunities for it's undergrads-since the Harvard name opens many doors.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>So why is it then that the best and brightest aspirants would still prefer to go to Harvard over Berkeley despite those problems you and your friends have mentioned? Berkeley is even cheaper than Harvard, this i found out from reading some of the posts of this site.
OK, I don't really consider tuition a problem. And I don't need a scholarship. I'm fortunate enough that my family can fiancially support my education even up to grad school. But for many bright aspirants out there who are not fortunate enough, why would they strive for a Harvard degree despite having been admitted at Berkeley??? Don't you think the school name now matters in this case???</p>

102

<p>
[quote]
What is the average class size at Berkeley and how big the difference is from Harvard and Stanford?

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Actually, the class sizes at Berkeley and at Stanford are more similar than most people. G&S I think posted it somewhere; I'm too lazy to look it up now. I'm just saying that if Berkeley continues to accept more and more students and funding keeps getting cut, then it is likely that class sizes will become larger than it is now, which is a bad thing.</p>

<p>
[quote]
I'm not too sure about this. As a Berkeley undergraduate student, I have many friends in Berkeley's grad schools who graduated from Harvard College. Their assessment? Harvard undergraduate education "sucks." The way they make it sound-Harvard College is essentially a big rat race to get professors' attention. Now, since profs "pretty much know" that they're dealing with "the smartest group of 17-24 year olds on the planet," they will often make themselves unavailable. Getting a personal attention (essential for good recommendations) at Harvard is one of the biggest hassles a student can go through, it seems. Harvard students, according to my grad school friends, not only have to be brilliant but they have to sabotage their peers.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Yeah, many Harvard students complain about their undergraduate education, and the professors. There are constantly articles in the Harvard Crimson about it. But I think this stems from the fact that Harvard is supposed to be the best, and some people's expectations were not met. I think even many of those disgruntled students would have preferred that to Berkeley. I haven't heard too much about sabotaging or deadly competition at Harvard, actually, so I don't know what to make of your anecdotes, except to say that these things probably happen everywhere. I've heard that Harvard is pretty easy once you get in, although some do complain of lack of attention from professors. ::shrug::</p>

<p>
[quote]
No. High-achieving highschoolers are misguided young people who PERCEIVE that Harvard is a better school than Berkeley. Why? Mainly because the history of many of America's greatest leaders and innovators is tied to Harvard. And it's tough to find a Harvard applicant who doesn't want to make it into the history books.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Yeah, look at how many U.S. presidents have come from Harvard. Harvard must be turning out some good people it has a reputation for turning out many of America's greatest leaders and innovators. My point is that there must be something behind the prestige. A school doesn't become the most prestigious university in the world by being mediocre.</p>

103

<p>I think part of it has to do with selectivity. Most people who get into Harvard (from California) got in UC Berkeley. Many of the people who are attending UC Berkeley and applied to Harvard were rejected from Harvard. My guess is that people want to go to a school that other people "worse than them" didn't get into. It justifies why they worked so hard in high school.</p>

104

<p>BTW, what exactly is endownment? where does this money come from?</p>

105

<p>You know, this entire thread has made me pretty tired. :/</p>

<p>sansai: <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Financial_endowment%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Financial_endowment&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

106

<p>
[quote]
vicissitudes
Member</p>

<p>You know, this entire thread has made me pretty tired. :/

[/quote]
</p>

<p>You can rest for a while and can come back anytime when you're fully charged. He He... You've been really contributing so much in this thread and I am glad to have read your post. you're quite a good resource of info along with the others here. Thank you so much. Enjoy life! :)</p>

107

<p>
[quote]
Take a school like Cornell: it's similar in that it's a large school, some parts state-funded, and it has many colleges. However, transferring from college to college is relatively easy, where in Berkeley's case it is sometimes difficult.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>You sure about this? How sure? And anyway, note how you switch from “relatively easy” to “sometimes difficult”- it’s not sometimes difficult at Cornell?</p>

<p>But you think ability to change majors is a big factor. Fine. That’s one thing. Change of attitude is another you list. Lack of a 24 hour library . . . funding per student, okay, that’s something . . . and more perks for regents scholars. Make a thorough list, nothing “off the top of your head,” nothing incomplete at this moment. But really, I think most of this list is minor, while increased perks for regents scholars might negatively affect funding for non-regents scholars in ways, and increased funding per student certainly could help.</p>

108

<p>
[quote]
vicissitudes
Member</p>

<p>sansai: <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Financial_endowment%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Financial_endowment&lt;/a>

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Thank you for the link. I’ve read it from that site that the money should remain intact??? In what way would this money be able to help the university if the amount should remain intact? Or, maybe they invest the money and use only the profits. So, this leads me to another question: who manages this fund? Where is this money invested? </p>

<p>If the person who takes charge of this fund is good in investment games... he can sure come up of ways to balloon the amount. </p>

<p>Sorry, I just find this weird. This kind of thing is not available in universities abroad. but this is very interesting. He he...</p>

109

<p>
[quote]
Look at it this way: what if a school accepted 100% of its applicants? Yes, even the girl with the 1.2 GPA and 320 SATs could get in. Would good students really want to go to a school like that? Could that school really be good, with these students abounding on its campus?

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Ever heard of self-selective? What if a school had only applicants with perfect applications, and exactly as many as were necessary to fill their ideal class size, and they all matriculated- 100% acceptance rate would not indicate how easy it is to get in at all. Now, back in reality, schools like Chicago and the elite all female LACs have very self-selective applicants and fairly high acceptance rate. Are they easy to get into? No, not really. Acceptance percentage alone is not really a good sign of difficulty of admittance without regard for the students applying.</p>

<p>
[quote]
If I'm inherently biased that privates are better than publics, why do I admit that Berkeley's graduate programs and the top private schools' graduate programs are about the same in quality?

[/quote]
</p>

<p>It’s possible you could just be prejudiced towards public undergraduate programs. I don’t think it’s so, but it’s possible.</p>

<p>
[quote]
Another example: I think Oxford and Cambridge are probably the best Universities in England. They're both public schools, yet I am admitting that they are better than all the private Universities in England. Why would I say that if I really inherently think that private schools are public schools?

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Well, I think public here means something different than the public in “Berkeley is public.”</p>

<p>
[quote]
All I am saying is that I think most Berkeley and Harvard students would rather be at Harvard than Berkeley. Is that fallacious? I also said that I believe this is a good indication that Harvard offers a better education (undergrad, at least) than Berkeley's.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>You might very well be right about the first part, but what exactly is the “better” that Harvard offers that Berkeley doesn’t (in the undergraduate area)?</p>

110

<p>I think it would get confusing if u took the Cal part from UCLA . For example, if u said UNiversity of Los Angeles, people might think it was USC. Or if u just put University of SAN Diego well there is already a private school named that. </p>

<p>Besides names are such a minor detail- what about these ridiculous tution hikes?</p>

111

<p>
[quote]
1. Something should be done about the impacted majors. At many top schools you can free choose majors but at Berkeley this is not the case. You have to apply for your major, and you may not get in. It's difficult to change majors. If someone in engineering does poorly and decides he wants to go do a different major, it's hard for him to apply to that major because he has such a low GPA now. The poor guy is stuck in something he doesn't want to do.</p>

<p>Or, take another guy. He is admitted into the college of L&S, and gets okay grades, and decides he want to become an engineer. Well, he has to apply to transfer to the college of engineering, and apply for the engineering major, and he may not get it.</p>

<p>The least Berkeley could do is just let these two guys switch places, but now they're both worse off.</p>

<p>Take a school like Cornell: it's similar in that it's a large school, some parts state-funded, and it has many colleges. However, transferring from college to college is relatively easy, where in Berkeley's case it is sometimes difficult. I mean, you have to apply to Haas just to be a business major, and about 50% are rejected, forcing them to major in something they don't want to major in.</p>

<p>If impacted majors are in such high demand, just take more funding and make more space, and take away some funding that's going to some "easy" majors in which students do very little in terms of studying and going to class.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>All of these things are TRUE. But what I'm interested in is their level of RELEVANCE. Yes, there are impacted majors. However, what is the likelihood that a student won't actually be allowed to declare them? Slim. I remember looking at a table. The figure we're discussing is less than 5-8% of those who apply for the major. In essence, FEW students are affected by Berkeley's policies on impacted majors and college transfers. So stop blowing this problem out of proportion. The vast majority of students are NOT affected. Now, I agree. Something should be done about this situation. But let's not make a papercut look like a cancer. </p>

<p>
[quote]

  1. The impersonal attitude. Why does Berkeley have it? I don't really understand this. For example, when I called someone at Cornell about financial aid she was very nice about it, but when I called the Berkeley financial aid office, I was told that I would have to be put on hold for 8 minutes, ended up waiting for 30, and got back a perfunctory response. I was trying to explain my situation and she just said "yeah yeah, get to the point." Was that attitude really necessary? It really makes students feel like the administration at Berkeley simply don't care about them.</p>

<p>The beaucracy is kind of a mess. I've heard of people complaining about how much paperwork it takes to apply for studying abroad, and how it's easier to do that at other colleges. Why does Berkeley have to make things so difficult for students? I was reading some old threads, and I came across one of GentlemanandScholar, a long time defender of Berkeley on the boards, complain about the beaucracy at Cal. Berkeley should do something about this.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>I'm sorry, but these anecdotes have their discontents. </p>

<p>Yes, it's true. I've been through the same experience calling financial aid. HOWEVER. Does that imply that it always happen? NO. Does it imply that it happens with every financial aid worker you talk to? NO. Does it imply that all of Berkeley's bureacratic offices are that way? NO. In fact, when you go in person to the financial aid office the situation is much nicer. I've been there about 5 times and everytime I've talked to different representatives and they have all been "nice." About the wait-all I can do is laugh. Are you so sheltered that you haven't sat in a waiting room for 30 minutes before? Waiting in line is a process you will have to go through many times in your life. Why is this such an issue? Have you ever tried calling a credit card? A bank to discuss something wrong with your balance? A computer technician? Let me tell you, 30 minutes is average, at best. At least the Berkeley fin aid representatives haven't been outsourced to India. </p>

<p>
[quote]

  1. This is one thing that has really bothered me about Berkeley, and that is the lack of a 24 hour library. Libraries, with the exception of finals week, are only open until two at the latest. Honestly USC was starting to look pretty good to me because it had a library that was open 24/6. In fact, I think I heard somewhere library hours used to be longer before there were funding cuts. I suspect that this is something Berkeley probably can't do much about, but it's something can be improved.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>This shows how uninformed you are about the resources Berkeley offers. In response to the budget cuts, the library on the top floor of Eshleman Hall is now open 24/7.</p>

<p>
[quote]

  1. Berkeley has been taking in more and more students while funding has been repeatedly cut.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Beware of half-truths. While STATE funding has been DECREASED, PRIVATE funding has INCREASED. Resources have been EXPANDED-to and beyond the level of Harvard, Yale, and MIT.</p>

<p>
[quote]
Some posters have mentioned that Berkeley should simply put some of the students to other UCs that are under capacity, such as UC Merced. I think UCSB and UCD (or some other UCs) were accepting applications past the application deadline date because they needed more students to fill the class.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Well, I don't agree. Sound elitist and impractical. Just how do you decide who is to get into Berkeley and who isn't? SAT? That's too discriminatory against minorities and poor people. GPA? How do you compare from school to school? Explain. </p>

<p>
[quote]
5. Offer more perks for regent scholars. I've seen many people get into Berkeley with regents, but decided to go somewhere else. If they are regent scholars it's likely that they were also accepted to another top school, so Berkeley needs to give them more incentives to come. I've heard of regent scholars complain that they get 1,000 - 2,000, while UCLA is much more generous with them. Also, other than scholarship, regent scholars don't get many other benefits. How about guaranteed spot at their selected major? Or extended library hours? Or something that can convince them to go to Berkeley? Because many of them now are choosing to go to other schools, and Berkeley is losing its top candidates.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>I'm not too sure about this. As a Regents scholar who had the opportunity to go to a "better" place (Harvard,) let me be the first to tell you that Berkeley has HUNDREDS of Regents. While it is true that many Regent Scholars REJECT Berkeley to go to "better" places, the majority do not. I know for a fact that over the years, more than 70% of Regents admits choose Berkeley. </p>

<p>
[quote]
These are just some of the things I thought of off the top of my head.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Well you better think of some other, "better" things.</p>

112

<p>
[quote]
So why is it then that the best and brightest aspirants would still prefer to go to Harvard over Berkeley despite those problems you and your friends have mentioned? Berkeley is even cheaper than Harvard, this i found out from reading some of the posts of this site.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Did my explanation of Harvard as myth and myth as desirable fly over your head or something? </p>

<p>
[quote]
OK, I don't really consider tuition a problem. And I don't need a scholarship. I'm fortunate enough that my family can fiancially support my education even up to grad school. But for many bright aspirants out there who are not fortunate enough, why would they strive for a Harvard degree despite having been admitted at Berkeley??? Don't you think the school name now matters in this case???

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Yes, you are right. For poor students who do not have scholarships, Berkeley is expensive. Harvard gives such kids a full ride. This is definetly a problem-one which Berkeley does not have the money to make "right." But I don't see how it detracts from the educational resources available at Berkeley. Education and opportunity are not the same thing-although they ARE related.</p>

113

<p>
[quote]
I know for a fact that over the years, more than 70% of Regents admits choose Berkeley.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Do you have a source for this claim?</p>

114

<p>
[quote]
Do you have a source for this claim?

[/quote]
</p>

<p>The Director told us at a Regents event.</p>

115

<p>greatestyen,</p>

<p>What I want to know is why do most students prefer Harvard to Berkeley when they know both schools are posed with the same threats and deal the same internal problems? Is it just about the scholarship privileges, which you’re saying, is plenty at Harvard, or there is something else? Another question: do you think these people picked Harvard over Berkeley because of prestige? And if prestige plays a role in choosing a school, shouldn’t Berkeley do something about it? </p>

<p>One of my proposals was to change its name because I believe both Berkely and UCLA can stand on their own, and are somewhat been pulled down by those other UC colleges. Do you agree or not? If you disagree, then what do you think are the best solutions?</p>

116

<p>Okay, and to further the question...70% of admits choose Berkeley over where? Do you know the breakdown and cross-admits?</p>

<p>That number may quite possibly be misleading.</p>

117

<p>
[quote=sensai]
QUESTION: If the UC has this legislative role to serve the citizen of Cali by providing them the best education possible ... why then the best and brightest cali citizens are NOT attending UC colleges? I'm NOT saying that those who go to UC are not smart but it is very clear the cr</p>

118

<p>
[quote]
I know..............but look at what Allorion typed!</p>

<p>
[quote]

If you want a debate about representative democracy and public trusts, bring it on. I'm afraid you don't know who you are dealing with in that aspect of knowledge.

[/quote]

[/quote]

Government and political science is my forte. </p>

<p>If someone wishes to challenge me on those grounds, I'll accept the challenge gladly. However, for someone who has written about it and discussed with lawyers and representatives the founding of America as much as I have, it is supremely insulting to be said to be said not know what what representative democracy is.</p>

<p>I usually don't like to issue challenges like that, but so far LC/PA/CST and guy with weird name have goaded me hard enough with the posts to do so.</p>

<p>
[quote]
Yes, Allorion at times also sounds like a sakky, jr. as well.</p>

<p>Just define it once explicitly and refer back to it- make it post 96, and just keep refering to it.

[/quote]

Sakky is a knowledgeable guy that I respect, but as for sounding like him--I certainly hope not.</p>

<p>I've always written and talked the way I do--my diction is my own. I also think I'm more positive than Sakky about Berkeley, usually, since most of his recommendations come with caveats.</p>

<p>Berkeley is an excellent university, by my measurement... I matriculated, after all. There's nothing wrong with the professors, or the facilities. The student body could be better, but it isn't exactly shabby except when compared with the top private schools, and even then match them in raw number of exceptional students.
Problems come with a conflict of interest to the politicians who have power over UC, and the long-term health and growth of the system.</p>

<p>
[quote]
1. Something should be done about the impacted majors. At many top schools you can free choose majors but at Berkeley this is not the case. You have to apply for your major, and you may not get in. It's difficult to change majors. If someone in engineering does poorly and decides he wants to go do a different major, it's hard for him to apply to that major because he has such a low GPA now. The poor guy is stuck in something he doesn't want to do.</p>

<p>Or, take another guy. He is admitted into the college of L&S, and gets okay grades, and decides he want to become an engineer. Well, he has to apply to transfer to the college of engineering, and apply for the engineering major, and he may not get it.</p>

<p>The least Berkeley could do is just let these two guys switch places, but now they're both worse off.</p>

<p>Take a school like Cornell: it's similar in that it's a large school, some parts state-funded, and it has many colleges. However, transferring from college to college is relatively easy, where in Berkeley's case it is sometimes difficult. I mean, you have to apply to Haas just to be a business major, and about 50% are rejected, forcing them to major in something they don't want to major in.

[/quote]

Ah. Sakky's argument.</p>

<p>There's are two primary reasons why this is instituted.
1) The professors at Berkeley I've talked to like the culture of sink-or-swim, and they believe it sets Berkeley apart from other colleges
2) Berkeley has some weak students, and knows it. Its way of dealing with it, and extracting the best of them, high school performance regardless, is to weed. </p>

<p>To put it bluntly, why have a bunch of dunces in a popular major when they will take away from the experience of those who are able and willing make the best of the opportunity? It will increase class size and hurt those best able to benefit from the majors.
If the impacted majors are to be made less painful, selectivity to the university must go up first.</p>

<p>This is the mindset of the university... which I don't necessarily believe is right, but it's there. Weeding is probably necessary, but switches colleges could be less arduous.</p>

<p>It could probably be more similar to Cornell's, which is annoying as well but not as difficult.</p>

<p>
[quote]

[quote]

I know for a fact that over the years, more than 70% of Regents admits choose Berkeley.

[/quote]

Do you have a source for this claim?

[/quote]

Not that I think you're lying, but I would like to see the source as well.</p>

<p>In my own experience, I know of 8 R/C scholars we had. Three went to Berkeley, four went to top private schools, and one went to UCLA.</p>

119

<p>
[quote]
What I want to know is why do most students prefer Harvard to Berkeley when they know both schools are posed with the same threats and deal the same internal problems?

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Sansai, please try to read what I say a little more closely. According to me, the inner problems which Berkeley has and the inner problems which Harvard has are problems which undergraduate students usually discover AFTER matriculating. In effect, I believe that students in general do not KNOW of te the problems associated with the two institutions. They choose based on prestige, wheather, parents, prestige, etc. You can't expect very many 18 year olds-even the ones going to the top private and public schools in America to know what EXACTLY they're getting themselves into. </p>

<p>
[quote]
Is it just about the scholarship privileges, which you’re saying, is plenty at Harvard, or there is something else?

[/quote]
</p>

<p>It's obviously a combination of factors. Money, location, prestige, and "atmosphere" are all taken into account. (This is more suited to the General forums.)</p>

<p>
[quote]
Another question: do you think these people picked Harvard over Berkeley because of prestige?

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Yes and no. Mostly yes. But you must realize that students associate prestige with quality. The higher the prestige, the better the quality. It's that simple to them. When you look at the bigger picture as we are attempting to do here, it's obvious that the issues in question are quite complex. </p>

<p>
[quote]
And if prestige plays a role in choosing a school, shouldn’t Berkeley do something about it?

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Yes? No? What do you want me to say? I don't support decreasing admit numbers in order to get a higher USNews ranking if that's what your asking. And neither do the Regents of the University of California or the state's legislature. As they and I see it, education should be expanded, not contracted. </p>

<p>
[quote]
One of my proposals was to change its name because I believe both Berkely and UCLA can stand on their own, and are somewhat been pulled down by those other UC colleges. Do you agree or not? If you disagree, then what do you think are the best solutions?

[/quote]
</p>

<p>No, of course I don't agree. I'm a big fan of public, social education and think all private schools should be forced to become state schools.</p>

120

<p>
[quote]
Okay, and to further the question...70% of admits choose Berkeley over where? Do you know the breakdown and cross-admits?

[/quote]
</p>

<p>No, I don't know the breakdown.</p>