<p>RML, you should know the answer to that by now.
Duke
Emory
Vanderbilt
Rice</p>
<p>If you don’t get that by now, I can arrange for another 75 threads to repeat the message.</p>
<p>These ranking are based on what each person thinks, am I right.
Why are OSU and Mitch on these list.</p>
<p>I’m at OSU right now and I can see what all the fuss is about( I’m not a student).
my questions are about maze and blue are self explanatory.</p>
<p>monydad, I kind of get what you mean. 
</p>
<p>But seriously, college convenience =/= prestige. </p>
<p>School prestige is often derived from great academics/curriculum + great alumni + contributions of the school’s output to society + great students + great faculty. Based on that, only HYPMS are superior to Berkeley. The schools that are ranked below HYPSM down to top 25 or top 30 (based on USNews) don’t differ much from each other.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>There is one major ranking of university colleges that, using measurements for 2 of RML’s 5 factors (contributions to society, great faculty), plus other factors, concludes that Berkeley is superior even to HYPMS. But that ranking does not seem to be too respected here on College Confidential ([Washington</a> Monthly](<a href=“http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/college_guide/rankings/national_university_rank.php]Washington”>http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/college_guide/rankings/national_university_rank.php)).</p>
<p>As far as I know, no major college ranking systematically measures the excellence of undergraduate “academics/curriculum”, except to the extent that is reflected in Peer Assessment scores. Those scores do exactly reflect RML’s high opinion of Berkeley. According to C<em>llege Pr</em>wler’s student assessments of academic quality, Berkeley gets an “A-”. More than 30 other colleges get higher grades.</p>
<p>As far as I know, no major college ranking systematically measures the accomplishments of college alumni. We have studies of median alumni salaries, of admission rates to a few prestigious professional schools, and of PhD completion rates. This data is not incorporated into US News, Forbes, Kiplinger, Wash Monthly, etc. Berkeley does not particularly shine by these measures. The WSJ “feeder school” study ranks it 41st. The payscale.com median salary scales rank it in the high teens for mid-career salaries or 30-something for starting pay (even though California is a high cost of living region). For PhD completion rates, Berkeley undergraduate alumni do not rank among the top 40 (<a href=“http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/college-search-selection/946344-best-undergraduate-education-3.html[/url]”>http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/college-search-selection/946344-best-undergraduate-education-3.html</a>)</p>
<p>US News does consider the qualifications of incoming students (selectivity according to admission rates, average GPA/Rank and test scores). By this measure, Berkeley ranks about 25th, which is where it winds up in the overall USNWR ranking of undergraduate schools. </p>
<p>So those are some more or less objective, numbers-driven indicators of the 5 factors RML cites with respect to one university. How do they come together to affect the opinions about that University held by the average Joe, or the average employer, or some subset of “top” employers, or recent college graduates, or any other segment of the population? I don’t believe we clearly know the answer to that. It strikes me that many of the CC posters most eager to know are first gens and immigrants who may be bringing a European or Asian perspective to their view of American universities. In many other countries there is a single leading “national” university, or a small number of them, to which admission is determined primarily by examination. Leadership positions in government and in state-run or commercial enterprises may be very strongly correlated to where one attended college. The USA does not exactly work that way. This may account for the differences of opinion between RML (a European) and Pizzagirl or hawkette.</p>
<p>RML,
Re your latest bumbling attempt to promote UC Berkeley</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>The question reflects a severe lack of understanding of America…again.</p>
<p>For the umpteenth time, prestige varies depending on who you are asking and where you’re asking the question. </p>
<p>Ask about UC Berkeley east of Denver (if you don’t know where Denver is, I suggest you get a map of the USA) and, rightly or wrongly, there is low visibility for the school. Anyone with even an elementary appreciation of America knows this. </p>
<p>Conversely, in response to you and mony, ask about REVD (Rice, Emory, Vanderbilt, Duke) in Asia and, rightly or wrongly, there is low visibility for these schools (Duke being most prominent). Anyone with even an elementary appreciation of Asia knows this. </p>
<p>UC Berkeley is a nice state school for the state of California (93% IS) with a very highly regarded set of graduate programs that attracts a much broader geographic cross section of students. But for the vast majority of Americans doing a college search for their undergraduate studies, UC Berkeley (and whatever prestige you or anyone may assign to the school) is not a factor. It may be prestigious for you, but for the vast majority of Americans, it never even gets on the radar screen. Why is this so hard you for you to grasp?</p>
<p>"
UC Berkeley is a nice state school for the state of California (93% IS) with a very highly regarded set of graduate programs that attracts a much broader geographic cross section of students. But for the vast majority of Americans doing a college search for their undergraduate studies, UC Berkeley (and whatever prestige you or anyone may assign to the school) is not a factor. It may be prestigious for you, but for the vast majority of Americans, it never even gets on the radar screen. Why is this so hard you for you to grasp?"</p>
<p>I sorta agree with hawkette. The average American family who lives outside California will not consider Berkeley high on their radar screens. For those who live in the Midwest, South, and East Coast, there are many peer universities that can provide a similar education in their backyards. Transportation and cost of living (varies) will be cheaper too.</p>
<p>“UC Berkeley is a nice state school for the state of California (93% IS) with a very highly regarded set of graduate programs that attracts a much broader geographic cross section of students. But for the vast majority of Americans doing a college search for their undergraduate studies, UC Berkeley (and whatever prestige you or anyone may assign to the school) is not a factor. It may be prestigious for you, but for the vast majority of Americans, it never even gets on the radar screen. Why is this so hard you for you to grasp?”</p>
<p>I agree with Hawkette too. Of course, same can be said of virtually every university in the nation save Harvard and perhaps MIT, Princeton, Stanford and Yale. </p>
<p>Schools like Brown, Cal, Chicago, Columbia, cornell, Dartmouth, Duke, etc… have a strong reputation among the educated elite and among major employers, but among the masses, most people will not really recognize those universities…not for their academic prowess anyway.</p>
<p>Al,
It’s different for the state Us, especially those that draw a huge number from their IS pool, eg, state Us in California, Texas, Illinois, Florida. Students from outside of those states don’t usually have State Us in those states on their college application lists. </p>
<p>For the highly ranked privates, I would concur that they are not as national as many posters would like for us to believe, but they certainly are on a scale greater than any State U and usually by a very wide margin.</p>
<p>% OOS , State U</p>
<p>2% , UC DAVIS
3% , UC SAN DIEGO
3% , UC IRVINE
4% , UC S BARBARA
4% , U FLORIDA
4% , U TEXAS
6% , UCLA
6% , U ILLINOIS
7% , UC BERKELEY
12% , U WASHINGTON
17% , U N CAROLINA
25% , PENN STATE
27% , GEORGIA TECH
28% , U VIRGINIA
32% , WILLIAM & MARY
32% , U WISCONSIN
35% , U MICHIGAN</p>
<p>% OOS , Private </p>
<p>38% , USC
45% , Rice
46% , Case Western
50% , U Rochester
50% , U Miami
58% , Stanford
59% , Rensselaer
63% , Cornell
64% , NYU
65% , Caltech
67% , Tulane
70% , Emory
71% , Columbia
71% , Boston College
74% , Brandeis
75% , Northwestern
75% , Tufts
75% , Wake Forest
75% , Lehigh
77% , Carnegie Mellon
79% , U Chicago
83% , U Penn
83% , Vanderbilt
84% , Harvard
84% , Princeton
85% , Johns Hopkins
87% , Duke
90% , Wash U
91% , MIT
92% , Notre Dame
93% , Yale
95% , Brown
96% , Dartmouth
98% , Georgetown</p>
<p>Whatever you say Hawkette.</p>
<p>I would argue that the vast, vast majority of regular Americans know that Duke, Michigan, Notre Dame and UNC are good schools as a byproduct of the national TV coverage their sports teams get.</p>
<p>I recommend that you all watch a Duke basketball game where Dick Vitale is commentating; he typically mentions how smart Duke students are and how they will all be “doctors, lawyers and bankers” at least 5 times a game.</p>
<p>Who’s Dick Vitale?
Is he correct that all Duke graduates become doctors, lawyers, or bankers?
Sounds boring.</p>
<p>But I think he’s wrong. Is warblersrule here? Duke grad? Archeologist? This Duck Vitale guy needs to get out more.</p>
<p>RML, you are so totally blinded with your “I love UCBerkeley so I’m going to insist that everyone in America is blinded with love for it too” that you fail to see that Hawkette is 100% correct with this:</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>No. They are AWARE that these schools exist as a byproduct of the national TV coverage their sports teams get. They INPUTE that they must be “decent schools” because they’ve heard about them – the same way most people figure Ohio State’s a decent school because they’ve heard about it. </p>
<p>Much the same way that in Asia, people are AWARE of certain schools and not of others (such as LAC’s) and they INPUTE that they must be good schools because they’ve heard about them (and that conversely, the schools they haven’t heard of can’t be good schools because, well, they haven’t heard about them).</p>
<p>Neither group is showing any self-awareness of the fact that a school could be a good school without necessarily being known to them. Deep Springs is a good school even though I’d never heard of it prior to my kids starting a college search.</p>
<p>Hawkette, ALL universities are regional, whether you admit it or not. Even at those supposedly “diverse” private universities, 60% of their undergraduate student population will come from a 300 mile area from campus.</p>
<p>Of course. All universities are regional, and all prestige is regional, basically beyond HYP and maybe SM. Which is why it’s so tiresome to hear about Berkeley blah blah blah, as if the world revolved around California.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Columbia University (47% from New England and the Mid-Atlantic)
UPenn (approx. 47% from the Mid-Atlantic and VA)
Middlebury College (44% from New England and New York)
Reed College (44% from the PNW and CA)
Macalester College (42% from the Midwest)
Duke (36% from the Southeast)
University of Chicago (31% from the Midwest)
CalTech (31% from California)
Colorado College (30% from the Rocky Mt region)
MIT (29% from New England and the Mid-Atlantic)</p>
<p>These numbers are cobbled together from college sites.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>RML really doesn’t get this. At all. He honestly, truly thinks that all over the country, high school seniors are desperately adding Berkeley to their dream-school lists while their parents are busy trying to hire every Berkeley grad in sight, when they aren’t bowing down to their superior intellect. Dude, it’s just a good school. Along with many others.</p>
<p>I think hawkette’s position in this thread needs further development. I would posit that most Americans have heard of Harvard and consider it prestigious. Is this only because they happen to know a Harvard graduate given that Harvard draws students from around the country? I think not.
Washington Monthly is really a very good ranking if you are looking at a school from the perspective of an outsider. If I were a taxpayer in a state deciding whether to approve funding increases for the state universities or a potential donor to a school, I would certainly look at the WM rankings.</p>
<p>“The average American family who lives outside California will not consider Berkeley high on their radar screens.” </p>
<p>This is true in my experience -even for the “well-above-average” student here- but I’m not really sure why. Could it be because Berkeley barely accepts anyone from outside California, so knowing this outsiders just ignore it?</p>
<p>In the schools I’ve been associated with in and around NYC area we’ve had many good students applying and attending U Michigan, but basically nobody to Berkeley. And yes Michigan is closer but is still usually a plane flight, so who cares. I don’t think that if you asked people here they would say Michigan is “better” than Berkeley. So maybe its simply that Berkeley is relatively unobtanium, so out of sight, out of mind?</p>
<p>I don’t know, just wondering out loud.</p>
<p>Does it have to do with its out-of-state tuition charges, vs. some of the alternatives?</p>
<p>But anyway the net result is that people here think about applying to U Mich, Berkeley they tend not to really consider or even think about, at all. Yet, at the same time I think if asked people here think it is among the premier state universities. I really can’t reconcile that.</p>
<p>Is it because the stats you’d need to get into Berkeley from here would alternatively get you into an elite private within a close drive to home, with no material cost difference?</p>
<p>hawkette, </p>
<p>I was not promoting Berkeley on CC. You were demoting it. I was merely saying its real status in the real world. </p>
<p>I never said Berkeley is prestigious in every corner of America. I would never say such claim. But I would never say Duke is, on the other hand. Only Harvard can really make such claim. And, obviously, Duke is not Harvard. But the way you assert it, you’re insisting it to be on Harvard’s level. </p>
<p>Berkeley may generally not be well-regarded in the South. But for those who care, Berkeley is prestigious. </p>
<p>I never said Duke isn’t prestigious. I said for those who care, Duke is prestigious. </p>
<p>In my previous post, I cited the criteria for school prestige. Using such criteria, I can group Duke with Berkeley, along with the lower Ivies, Chicago, NU, JHU, Michigan and the like. I cannot put it in a group above Berkeley’s because - prestige wise - there is very little difference that separates Berkeley from HYPSM. </p>
<p>I understand you’re worried about Berkeley’s low OOS and Internatioanl Students (Int’lS), percentage-wise. I get it that - for you - its low % of OOS and Int’lS is the cause of your apprehension for its being a prestigious school. Let me tell you why you’re wrong.</p>
<p>School Prestige is not dependent on the amount of OOS or Int’lS. Oxford have low Int’l students. Yet it is quite prestigious. On the other hand, a lot of universities out there have very high % of Int’lS yet are far from being prestigious schools. </p>
<p>There are more Int’l Students at USC than there are at Oxford. But can you honestly say that USC is more prestigious than Oxford? No. Then, therefore, there has got to be a good combination of factors for attaining School Prestige. For me, School Prestige is a product of the following:</p>
<p>Excellent Faculty
Excellent Students
Great, powerful, wealthy alumni
Great academic facilities
Great Research Output</p>
<p>Any school that misses one or two of these factors would suffer from the Prestige Rank. Any school that misses 3 or 4 of these factors is hardly called a prestigious school. </p>
<p>Let’s use SAT as the basis for intelligence as I’m sure you’ve thought of it as a perfect measure of intelligence. </p>
<p>Duke may have higher SAT score students than Berkeley has on average. But can Duke score better than Berkeley in all the rest of the given criteria? No. In fact, I think Duke would seriously fall behind Berkeley in all the other criteria. That’s aside from the point that no one can honestly say that Berkeley students aren’t smart students.</p>