Huge (untrue) Myth About Berkeley

Colleges and Universities A-Z University of California - Berkeley
21

<p>It still sounds like one of those, "Minorities are such and such" comments. If he said instead, "Only the Mexicans at Cal are dumb," would it be a mere observation?</p>

22

<p>Liberal, have you ever been to Southern California? Central California? You keep expanding this from UCB and Berkeley to the whole state. Maybe you could say there are kids here from all parts, but they might not be fully representative of their towns.</p>

<p>What do you mean by culture? Is there any real culture? What makes California's culture any less real than say, southern culture? </p>

<p>I love how you claim all transfers are dumb people. That's terrible and untrue.</p>

<p>What school is not basically a machine to churn out degree seekers? It's just the essential nature of schools. that's just how it is. All the good stuff comes as a consequence to this. Negative things do to, but it's a business transaction. That's higher education in America.</p>

<p>In how many departments have you taken upper divs? How many friends have you talked to that have taken upper divs in other departments? It seems sort of ridiculous to generalize as much as you are about the state of upper div classes (unless you have extensive evidence, even anecdotal (from many different departments)).</p>

23

<p>I transferred, and now that I'm applying for grad school, I've only gotten into two top programs in my field.</p>

<p>I know, I'm pretty dumb for not getting into EVERY top program in my field.</p>

24

<p>Oh well,
maybe he hates every school that does not support Dubya.</p>

25

<p>"
You forget that these same "dumb" people also had to do well on the same standardized tests that you took. It's not like there's some "EZ Cali" edition of the SAT."</p>

<p>Colleges use an index of class ranking and sat to choose who gets in. If your gpa is less reflective of ability, than obviously that lowers standards in relation to other states.</p>

<p>"Did you ever, I dunno...try to talk to anyone? I had lots of friends at UCLA of all ethnicities. I'm just curious. "</p>

<p>I talk to lots of people and have friends of all backgrounds. Howeever, it is more difficult to penetrate certain groups relative to others. You talk to them, you see them, but people will tend to gravitate to their own cliques. There are exceptions, but just look at most frats and clubs. There are lots of Koreans-only and other clubs. You don't see any white-only clubs do you? The only clubs that seem to have any racial blindness are professional clubs. The frats themselves tend to gravitate to all people of one ethnicity in general anyways.</p>

<p>People's best friends, the ones they actually hang out with all the time, tend to be of the same race. Berkeley tends to be as cliquish as high school was for me. THough this is true for other public schools as well, it would be less true for a smaller school, especially one that had a better and less fragmented dorm system.</p>

<p>"Sorry, but having done studies at at least a few different schools, talked to friends at other top schools, and done at least some comparing and contrasting, I don't think that Berkeley is that unique amongst large schools. I really think that you would have been better served by a smaller, more LACish school."</p>

<p>Thats the UC system. UT and NYU have not had such big problems, nor are they as understaffed per capita as the UC's seem to be.</p>

<p>"Oddly, its been mainly white people that have been most tolerant all around and have actual manners. I'm not talking about saying hi to each other or something that can be considered a privelege. I'm talking about things like getting your work done, respecting people's private space, and showing some consideration for the feelings of others you maintain long-term relationships with."</p>

<p>This may be the asian-ness of the campus, because asian parents to underplay the emotional aspects of their children development and focus on academics and job aspects. You just can't expect people to display typical manners here. You see someone in a club or that you were introduced to, you should say hi to them. If you have a lot of people without manners that don't do that, than those that would will tend to not do so either because its no longer expected. Small subtle stuff like is related to the size of the campus and help make Berkeley an especially impersonal experience. "White" people tend to have a greater diversity of backgrounds and are generally from the middle class so you can expect a little more predictability in their manners and better manners to boot.</p>

<p>Most other minorities, especially such groups as the Vietnamese, Koreans, (maybe even smaller groups like Armenians, whatever) etc. usually form very concentrated communities, and they usually have pretty similar experiences and thsu similar personalities. This contributes to the cliqueness. I say this as a member of one of the aforementioned groups. It seems to me a lot of people use their minority status as a badge to not have manners or to act in different, usually more obnoxious ways. There are always exceptions but Berkeley seems to have a lot of "Bad" apples, as would be reflected by my experiences.</p>

<p>My main point is that California's secondary school system which fills up the UC's seems to be doing a bad job of training kids such that College feels a lot like high school redux. It also cheapens the college experience because it seems like a lot of people don't have a lot of emotional maturity. At the same time, the standards at UC have been lowered a bit by the budget crisis and seem very unresponsive to student needs. It took them like 2 years to fix how impossible it was to log on to telebears in peak time among other things.</p>

<p>Sure its subjective, I've admitted that many times, but just because you say, "Oh how can you generalize, when you don't have experiences in other areas," doesn't make my points not have substantive value. Likewise, I can ask events to disprove things I've said? If you've had smaller classes with fewer students per GSI, please point them out. I find the lack of hard examples or conflicting data to be supportive of my claims. I've taken classes in upper div for economics, statistics, mcb, and poli sci. These are probably the largest departments on campus so yes, I have selection bias for those large majors. The facts still hold true that by letting too many people in, these majors become even more impacted and crowded, resulting in a lower on average quality education. A lot of people have to resort to generic, "you can't prove that absolutely" arguments or ad-hominem attacks instead of replying to it in kind. Please, if you have contrary anecdotes, contribute them. I think everyone here has to acknowledge the extent of the impersonality and lack of quality of Berkeley's undergraduate system in comparison to its name. I bet you can get a similar or better experience at one of the smaller UC's or even UCLA (at least the weather will be better). The Berkeley name in my feeling means less and less each year, and I think thats being reflected in the USNews ranking of Berkeley. Its academic reputation has gone down a bit to my recollection and its overall ranking has gone down even more as they try to cram more students per capita.</p>

<p>Transfer students will tend to be dumber on average than the normal weeded-out student. Most everyone at Berkeley acknowledges this fact, they can get in with lower standards, and most a lot of the incompotent students I've met here have been transfers. Some have been pretty smart, but on the whole those who avoid the weeding-out process are dumber (not to say that those that get in normally are geniuses on average either).</p>

<p>Large public schools do churn out people to go to whatever professional school, indeed if you want to go to one, I would advise people to go to one outside of UC. It will likely be cheaper if you're not an in-stater and provide a similar if not better experience (since you dont have to deal with the bureacracy or obnoxious californians who act the same way in real life as most people do on the internet).</p>

26

<p>
[quote]
People's best friends, the ones they actually hang out with all the time, tend to be of the same race. Berkeley tends to be as cliquish as high school was for me. THough this is true for other public schools as well, it would be less true for a smaller school, especially one that had a better and less fragmented dorm system.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>I’m sorry liberal, I can’t agree with your premise that somehow people are more segregated here than elsewhere. I agree, more should be done to get people of different backgrounds (race, economic, whatever) together. But you think Berkeley is somehow different than other schools in this regard? Do you think that people don’t tend to separate by race, whether by choice or some other reason, all over the world? All across college campuses? Yeah, there might be more interwoven groups at some schools than others, but at most places, I think people tend to separate by race, at least partially. I noticed it at a small liberal arts college in southern California, one that is supposed to be particularly racially friendly. It’s true to an extent in all schools! My friend at Harvard is in many Black clubs, or clubs mainly membered by black students. My friend at a small, prestigious northeastern liberal arts college (also known for being racially friendly) has an African roommate and guess what- most of her friends (and her boyfriend) are black. So while I agree this occurs, it’s no different than many other schools (private and public). Should it be changed? Sure. </p>

<p>I can’t say I’ve experienced any Vietnamese, Korean, or Armenian people acting obnoxious or different because of their identity with the groups. My good friend’s roommate is Armenian and in the Armenian club and is one of the coolest guys that I know. What do you propose be done about group identification at Berkeley? What sort of possible situation would you suggest (that people would find reasonable) that would improve the situation?</p>

<p>The California secondary institution sends many kids to many schools, I bet at the very least at least one person to every school considered “better” than Berkeley by popularity contests such as US News and World Report. What is different about these kids? What is different about the experiences that they have in public high schools? </p>

<p>Life is subjective. I agree with you, my situation is as subjective as yours. I’m saying that you can’t generalize the experiences of your time and the way its students act to every UC, every person in the state of California, and many public schools. I ask again, have you been to Southern California? How many students per GSI do you expect? Absence of proof is not proof of your claims. </p>

<p>You have picked a few of the larger departments for upper divs, but sure, there are others. There should be fewer students for class. I agree with you, this should be changed. I think more lecturers or profs should be hired. What sort of arguments are you looking for? Cal doesn’t let in enough people? More people being let in results in a lower quality education? How? Proove it.</p>

<p>
[quote]
I think everyone here has to acknowledge the extent of the impersonality and lack of quality of Berkeley's undergraduate system in comparison to its name. I bet you can get a similar or better experience at one of the smaller UC's or even UCLA (at least the weather will be better). The Berkeley name in my feeling means less and less each year, and I think thats being reflected in the USNews ranking of Berkeley. Its academic reputation has gone down a bit to my recollection and its overall ranking has gone down even more as they try to cram more students per capita.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Berkely has a 4.8 peer ranking in us news. Stop saying that it’s view is low, seriously. It’s so annoying and idiotic. What number is high enough for you?</p>

<p>Lack of quality of undergraduates. Well, at least this changed from everyone is of low quality to what suggest an average of low quality. </p>

<p>
[quote]
Transfer students will tend to be dumber on average than the normal weeded-out student. Most everyone at Berkeley acknowledges this fact, they can get in with lower standards, and most a lot of the incompotent students I've met here have been transfers. Some have been pretty smart, but on the whole those who avoid the weeding-out process are dumber (not to say that those that get in normally are geniuses on average either).

[/quote]
</p>

<p>I don’t know what most Berkeley students would acknowledge. I haven’t seen any polls. </p>

<p>
[quote]
Large public schools do churn out people to go to whatever professional school, indeed if you want to go to one, I would advise people to go to one outside of UC. It will likely be cheaper if you're not an in-stater and provide a similar if not better experience (since you dont have to deal with the bureacracy or obnoxious californians who act the same way in real life as most people do on the internet).

[/quote]
</p>

<p>So here you extend your experience here to all UCs. That’s not fair or logically sensical. Also, even from out of state, the UCs tend to cost less than the expensive private schools. Many Californians are going to be at almost every school you go to in this country. Watch out for those shady Californians. You imply that no other schools have bureaucracy. You also say that schools outside of the UC provide a similar if not better experience to it. Based on what, exactly? </p>

<p>For the record, I’m polite in real life. I hold the door open for people, say please and thank you, and what not. Sometimes I get angry when you libel and conclude foolish things. I’m sorry that you had a bad experience. I wish it went better for you. Sure, share your experience, but don’t make illogical conclusions from it. That’s not fair to anybody.</p>

27

<p>As I said, Berkely makes it relatively easier to separate by race. You don't have dorms, you don't have a smaller campus which would make it harder for minority groups to segregate. You of course chose to totally ignore my point in that regard.</p>

<p>Berkeley has been fluctuating, it had around a 4.5 a previous year, wheras before it was consistently a 4.9 up there with harvard, stanford, and yale. It's seems to still be on a downward trend, even if the number this year seems to have recovered a bit.</p>

<p>Fine it is illogical to say UC, but it seems one of the main argument was that Berkeley was no different from the other UC's. I already pointed out that other large state universities don't have the same problems Cali does, so maybe UCB isn't that different. In addition, its worth it to pay the extra money at those large private schools because they offer much more aid than private universities do, such that it becomes cheaper or as cheap as Berkeley easily. The high price of tuition there is by no means a set price.</p>

<p>I base it on conversations with my other friends at other schools and by having visiting and attending some of those schools over the summer. Sure you can make a "the devil you know" argument saying its just because of exposure to one school, but there are a lot of things I've noticed thats unique to Berkeley.</p>

<p>I've met a lot of people, undergrad, grad, whatever, that seem to agree with various aspects of the UCB exerpeience and have had the same things happened to them too, so I doubt my experiences are isolated.</p>

<p>Indeed, in the first thread, people usually agreed with some or not all points, and there didn't seem to be a consistent disagree, except from the avaricious pro-UCB'ers. I'm just sounding the alarms out there for people who have never been to UCB. I doubt anyone will chose not to go merely because of some random poster online. But if and when they do visit the question, they'll be able to ask harder questions and get at the truth underneath themsleves. I bet a lot of people will be deterred from going to UCB at that point.</p>

28

<p>"You see someone in a club or that you were introduced to, you should say hi to them. If you have a lot of people without manners that don't do that, than those that would will tend to not do so either because its no longer expected."</p>

<p>LC speaks the truth. I don't even know whether I should say hi or not anymore, since some just ignore me straight up/walk pass with their body but keeping their eye on me.</p>

29

<p>


</p>

<p>Well, this is somewhat true, but only in some circumstances. But it works vice versa too. I know someone who really isn't smart at all, but scored well on the SAT. I don't want to get into more details, but yeah, let's just say that person isn't smart at all.</p>

<p>


</p>

<p>Well, there are clubs that don't specifically state 'white only,' but it's implied.</p>

<p>


</p>

<p>I find this somewhat offensive. As an out-of-state student, I find Californians do act differently, but c'mon, associating manners solely with race? </p>

<p>


</p>

<p>Are transfer students necessarily dumber? This seems unjustified. It's just transfer students didn't try as hard in high school and thus tried hard at CCs. <em>Sigh</em> I know someone who is a transfer student and he's really, incredibly intelligent. (He's majoring in Physics as well.)</p>

<p>Regarding the last bit about Californians, I'd say Californians are generally friendly. I've been to where you live, and I can't say that the people I met were particularly friendly...but that's just my opinion. It is also extremely segregated there, so to critique Berkeley especially for the fact that it's segregated would be ridiculous. I'll just say that probably the only reason why my high school wasn't segregated as much as Berkeley, or if at all, is because 85%+ of the student body is Caucasian. Hence, minorities didn't really group together. However, i bet if my high school were more diverse and actually had a significant number of minorities, etc, then it would also be cliquey. I don't think Berkeley is particular regarding this issue.</p>

30

<p>To quote LiberalCensor: "I hate berkeley because there are so many untalented people here masquerading as intelligent individuals. They're ability to affect the social and academic environment at Berkeley is quite profound, but I won't go too much into the details but a simple story upon which many situations can be extrapolated on can illustrate my point. If you have fewer, higher quality people, you would have a much better environment. People would know things about current events, or rather at least know even English."</p>

<p>Ummm... if you're gonna bash people because they don't know English, perhaps you should make sure you do first! ... it's THEIR ability, not THEY'RE. It is not possessive. You cannot extrapolate ON, you extrapolate FROM. </p>

<p>I have no problem with you stating your opinion. But you might want to make certain you really are more skilled than the people you denigrate.</p>

31

<p>Are transfer students necessarily dumber? This seems unjustified. It's just transfer students didn't try as hard in high school and thus tried hard at CCs. <em>Sigh</em> I know someone who is a transfer student and he's really, incredibly intelligent. (He's majoring in Physics as well.)</p>

<p>Not all transfer students "didn't try as hard in high school." Many are there for other reasons. The '05 Valedictorian from my sons school was admitted to Cal, UCLA and USC and stayed at home in a CC for family reasons. A good friend of his in his class will do the CC route because of family finances; his parents make to much for financial aid. He scored high on SAT's and has an excellent GPA, over 4.0. Everyone has their own circumstances. And then there are those that blew it in high school.</p>

32

<p>Yes, but most didn't try hard in high school and tried hard in CC; this is only generally speaking. Then again, if I say this, maybe I'll be forced by default to agree with Liberalcensors, if he's speaking generally.</p>

33

<p>I didn't mean to be offensive with my asian story, but it seems generally true to me that people from minority groups tend to gravitate to each other, sometimes because language and similar backgrounds make it easier to relate to each other. Berkeley seems this way in general, and I haven't really noticed any whites-only clubs, maybe frats, but not clubs. </p>

<p>It seems Berkeley makes it easier for people to ignore one another because of its sheer size and organization and reinforce such natural proclivities for people to stick around people like that.</p>

<p>Transfer students seem to have a lower barrier to overcome than normal students. In general since they are only here for 1 or maybe 2 years they care less about they will naturally tend to care less about the social environment than others who will have to stay here longer, (its not necessarily their fault, they may just be trying hard to get through school quick and get a job depending on their background). But as a whole, this makes the body at berkeley made up of more people unlikely to care about or contribute to the overall Berkeley experience.</p>

34

<p>Liberal,</p>

<p>
[quote]
There are lots of Koreans-only and other clubs. You don't see any white-only clubs do you? The only clubs that seem to have any racial blindness are professional clubs. The frats themselves tend to gravitate to all people of one ethnicity in general anyways.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>There aren't too many clubs for the "status quo" because those people have one big club called "everywhere." Or so says a friend of mine.</p>

<p>I'll give you the converse. Here in Japan, there are lots of "white people" clubs. There aren't any "Japanese people clubs." This is something that minorities seem to do.</p>

<p>As a transfer, I found that it was kind of hard at UCLA to really get involved in the same way that freshman admits did merely because a lot of the groups had established themselves with freshman admits.</p>

<p>
[quote]
But as a whole, this makes the body at berkeley made up of more people unlikely to care about or contribute to my overall Berkeley experience.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Hahaha, fixed. :p</p>

<p>
[quote]
The Berkeley name in my feeling means less and less each year, and I think thats being reflected in the USNews ranking of Berkeley. Its academic reputation has gone down a bit to my recollection and its overall ranking has gone down even more as they try to cram more students per capita.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>I dunno man. Berkeley seems to hover pretty constantly around the same spot.</p>

<p>Plus, US News is an incredibly inaccurate gauge since they've changed their criteria so many times...</p>

35

<p>How old are you, liberal censors? Because Cal has been ranked about the same for quite a while. Meaning, it was ranked the same when you applied as it is now. Face facts, you couldn't get into a school ranked any higher than Berkeley, so why are you complaining. Its not like you had any better options or else you would have taken them. Get on with your failure of a life and try to take just a touch of resposibility for how things have turned out. That's what makes me laugh about you right-wingers, you preach individual responsibility, yet you constanty blame your failures on hippies and minorites and Berkeley itself. You blame everyone and every thing but yourself.</p>

36

<p>UCB is a GPA whore.</p>

<p>Find any elite college that puts that much weight on class rank and GPA(and has 99% of students who were in the top 10% of their class)</p>

37

<p>G & S: definately not the former. Who knows about the latter?</p>

38

<p>Well, the "elite colleges" certainly have fewer applicants to go through with.</p>

<p>This year, UCB received over 40k applications, and UCLA received nearly 50k applications. Since there are so many applicants, a lean towards GPA and SAT scores probably made their life much more easier.</p>

<p>In my opinion, the "elite colleges" also weigh heavily on the GPA and SAT scores, but since their incoming class size is so small and their applicant pool is so strong, they have to find other ways to discern among applicants as well (+ a pinch of luck) thus high GPA and SAT scores for them are already the baseline for acceptance.</p>

<p>But I know what you mean; after a certain GPA and SAT score, the UC will "auto" accept (auto not really auto) provided that the applicant doesn't write any irrelevant personal statement.</p>

39

<p>


</p>

<p>The clubs are out there. I get what you mean. It bugs me too, but you have to deal with it. I was just surprised that there was so much racial tension at Berkeley. I've actually learned more racist words here than I did when I lived in another state. </p>

<p>


</p>

<p>To be honest, I don't really care about improving the Berkeley experience. I'm using it at a stepping stone to go to a good graduate school, so I can get my diploma and earn money. It's kind of pathetic, but true. I never worried about "having *****loads of good times" at college or anything because I knew I wanted a graduate degree. Then again, I have honestly attended 7 schools in my life (due to my parents divorcing, moving, etc. ) so I don't really get attached to my schools nor care. I make new friends and then lose contact with old ones, so I don't really put that much emphasis on most of my friendships either. It's just life to me: constant motion. So yeah, I'm probably one of those people you are talking about.</p>

40

<p>Daderoo, I thought this was all too boring for you?</p>