Harvard Vs Uc Berkeley

College Search & Selection
141

<p>
[quote]
I don't believe there's any evidence to suggest Cal professors are any better than profs at any top private schools or LACs.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>You're right, there isn't. But there's no way to measure teaching quality. If there were, US News would be using it. So, what do you look at when you look at professors? Curriculum vitae, essentially. And most of Berkeley's professors are very accomplished, leaders in their field, who publish influential books and articles highly cited in journals and such. That's why Berkeley is known for its academic quality. Teaching? Hit or miss. The same as at any school.</p>

<p>By the way, for class sizes:</p>

<p>Berkeley: 62% under 20, 14% over 50
Harvard: 69% under 20, 11% over 50</p>

<p>Not very different.</p>

<p>
[quote]
When it comes to job placement in say Wall Street though, schools that don't have a lot of "academic cachet" like Dartmouth and Duke solidly destroy Berkeley in recruitment because of their overall prestige.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>I won't criticize your thought process there because you're a new poster, but the reason that Dartmouth and Duke "destroy" Berkeley is not because of their prestige (to recruiters, they hold no more prestige than Berkeley); it's because of their location. Wall Street is on the East Coast, as are Dartmouth and Duke.</p>

<p>Now let's look at Dartmouth's and Duke's placement into top companies in Silicon Valley. Guess what? Berkeley destroys them. And it probably does in LA, SF, and all over the West Coast. (One thing to note about Berkeley: it has maintained high-quality academics while also educating many people, a relation which is often negative correlated. Because of this, Berkeley's grads stretch its prestige, as they populate--if not dominate--academia, and high-paying companies as well. Berkeley's grads are everywhere in esteem.)</p>

142

<p>
[quote]
Well, Silicon Valley is a prime location for engineers.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Not just engineers. Computer scientists (yes, this is often separated from engineering), including software developers, as well as consultants and a lively finance scene.</p>

<p>
[quote]
I don't think Berkeley engineers would be favored by Google or Microsoft in any case over engineers from say MIT or Duke. It's just that less apply for positions in that region than Berkeley grads.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>And recruiters don't favor MIT and Duke (for Wall Street, for example) over Berkeley grads. It's just that they apply less for positions in that region. Why go to the East Coast when there are plenty of opportunities where they are?</p>

<p>
[quote]
However, recruiters actively favor grads from HYPSM, Duke, Dartmouth, etc. over Berkeley grads.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Want to give a source for that? In all my time on CC and many explorations of such recruiting, never have I heard such a claim made seriously. The general wisdom is that they do not "actively favor" those grads. And if they do, then companies in SV will favor Berkeley over grads from Duke, Dartmouth, HYP, etc.</p>

<p>Really, it's commonly known that it isn't your alma mater that gets you the job. In some cases, it might help you get an interview. However, it's the applicant qualifications--his experience, his knowledge, his skills--that get him the job.</p>

<p>
[quote]
If someone from Berkeley applies for an analyst postition at GS, then someone from Harvard, Wharton, Duke, etc. will most likely get the job over this person if all things are more or less equal.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>No. Things are never that equal. It's going to depend on the applicant.</p>

<p>
[quote]
Check out some IBanking forums if you don't believe me.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>I have extensively, thanks, and most of what you're claiming is the same that newbies to the field claim.</p>

<p>
[quote]
but it is not considered a solid target for the top investment banking and consulting firms.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>At WS, perhaps--but they aren't going to really target a school 3,000 miles away. Notice that Stanford doesn't do as well, either, and guess what? It's 3,000 miles away as well.</p>

143

<p>
[quote]
Harvard, Wharton, Duke,

[/quote]
</p>

<p>One is different from the others. Which one doesn't belong?</p>

144

<p>Companies will hire those who do well in interviews. The well-informed recruiter will go to those schools with excellent programs in whatever fields they're looking for, regardless of their overall undergraduate rankings in USNWR. In engineering other than biomedical, it means that colleges like MIT, Stanford, Berkeley, Illinois, Michigan, and Carnegie-Mellon are looked at more favorably than Duke.</p>

145

<p>
[quote]

Quote:
Harvard, Wharton, Duke,
One is different from the others. Which one doesn't belong?

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Harvard, obviously...</p>

146

<p>"berkeley is no where near a top 10 undergrad school..."</p>

<p>Since when is the #20-21 undergraduate school "nowhere near" the T10 school.
And in what area? Alumni giving? Class size (especially in intro courses)? Maybe. But surely not in peer assessment; that's right, in the opinion of those who KNOW higher education, Berkeley is tops.</p>

147

<p>
[quote]
But surely not in peer assessment; that's right, in the opinion of those who KNOW higher education, Berkeley GRAD is tops.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>There, I finished that for you.</p>

148

<p>^ Berkeley undergrad is tops too...</p>

<p>USNWR undergrad program rankings in engineering and business have Berkeley at #2 (tied with your 'furd) and #3, respectively.</p>

149

<p>Harvard = more prestige
Berkeley = better deal for your money (if you're in-state)</p>

150

<p>"Harvard = more prestige
Berkeley = better deal for your money (if you're in-state)"</p>

<p>hahahaha that's a joke I hope. As a in-state California resident who was accepted to both schools this year, I can PROMISE you that unless your family makes over $150,000+ Harvard is a cheaper school. My family income is under $100,000 and Harvard ended up being about $18,000-$20,000 cheaper a year then Berkeley.</p>

151

<p>was EAD really banned? how would anyone know this? [sorry off topic]</p>

152

<p>
[quote]
As a in-state California resident who was accepted to both schools this year, I can PROMISE you that unless your family makes over $150,000+ Harvard is a cheaper school. My family income is under $100,000 and Harvard ended up being about $18,000-$20,000 cheaper a year then Berkeley.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Yes, because your own personal case is the only one, right?</p>

<p>(Harvard made you pay as little as $5,000 dollars at an income of sub-100k?)</p>

153

<p>
[quote]
Harvard made you pay as little as $5,000 dollars at an income of sub-100k?

[/quote]
</p>

<p>That actually sounds about right. The new financial aid initiatives at the top privates are phenomenal.</p>

154

<p>Harvard required my family to pay about $6,000 on a slightly under $100,000 income. They also required me to have a part time summer job.</p>

155

<p>
[quote]
That actually sounds about right. The new financial aid initiatives at the top privates are phenomenal.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>That's true, but I don't think that's terribly common. I know quite a few who made about 100k and Harvard required them to pay more (this past year). Of course, finaid is a complicated business, so I'm willing to bet that it can vary a considerable amount for cases like these.</p>

<p>Notably, Harvard's initiatives have expanded the most for families making up to $180k. Even Stanford, even with its expanded financial aid, typically gives free tuition to those making up to $100k, meaning they have to pay for room/board, etc. (effectively making it cheaper than a UC).</p>

156

<p>Harvard is 1000000 times better than Berkeley in every single way</p>

157

<p>I hope my post didn't come off as hating Berkeley. Both of my best friends attend Berkeley. I stayed with one for about 6 days during spring semester. Berkeley has it's advantages: great coffee shops and bookstores, famous professors, great sports teams, etc. However, I was a little disappointed when I attended three philosophy class and the number of kids in them were very large ( i.e 50, 100+, 250+). I was merely pointing out in my post that even for in-state students, Berkeley is often not a cheaper school.</p>

158

<p>Berkeley, UCLA, and the other UC schools are much more expensive for a CA resident making under $150,000 than Harvard, Princeton, Stanford, and many other private universties --- who this year started using their endownments to make educations for upper middle income families almost free.</p>

159

<p>butchokoy is simply a poster boy for berkeley. Does anyone here actually consider Berkeley to be a top 10 undergrad school? I understand location matters, but Stanford grads do very well in job placement all over the country (wallstreet, LA .....). When a school is that uniformly respected, I doubt the fact that its in California (5 hour flight) is really that much of a hurdle to getting jobs elsewhere. If people had to name the top 10 schools I bet it would be some variation of HYPSM, Penn, Columbia,CAL Tech Duke, then you can throw in some others....but Berkeley is not even there let alone the number 5 school ...</p>

160

<p>
[quote]

[quote]

Harvard made you pay as little as $5,000 dollars at an income of sub-100k?

[/quote]

That actually sounds about right. The new financial aid initiatives at the top privates are phenomenal.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Wow, that's great... my parents only make ~40,000, and my "top private" college is making us pay 21,000 a year!</p>

<p>Screw prestige, what a great value!</p>