<p>I'll offer a different opinion:</p>
<p>Everyone is saying go to UCDavis. However, I want you to consider this carefully before deciding. First of all, did you visit both campuses? Personally (and many agree) I think Berkeley offers a much more interesting city. I've found out over the years that high school students visit colleges for 1 day and have this perception of what kind of life they'll lead there, or if it's their "dream college". I know so many people who got rejected from their "dream school" only to love the college they now attend. College life is often different from how you imagine it as a high school senior. Now I'm not saying "you'll end up hating your dream college" or anything of the sort, but I'm starting to think colleges are more alike than people think. You're taught the same material in your intro chem/bio/math classes, offered the same student clubs, etc. A lot of the differences are in the little things that you wouldn't normally consider. For example, I used to prefer the UCLA campus to the Berkeley campus. However, it takes FOREVER to walk out of the UCLA campus to get off-campus food, whereas the dorms at Berkeley are surrounded by restaurants, and it's so convenient. That's something I don't see any prospective students consider.</p>
<p>Okay, so the general idea is, I believe what you do at a college is more important than the college itself, given that the colleges are fairly similar (for example, two upper UCs). So what are some good reasons to go to Berkeley? First of all, someone wrote this:</p>
<p>
[quote]
I chose Davis over Berkeley because I think that it is a better school for students who want to pursue a career in the medical field (more research opportunities is the biggest plus).
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I think Berkeley's med school admission rate is quite a bit higher than Davis's. Part of this might be that Berkeley students score higher on MCATs because they're better prepared. However, what if you come to college and decide you don't want to be pre-med anymore? Berkeley beats Davis in almost every department, and it offers a more marketable degree. So, if you end up not knowing what career you want to go into, at least you're a Berkeley graduate which means you're more likely to get a good job offer. There are other factors, like higher graduation rates.</p>
<p>Anyway, I do agree that it's more competitive at Berkeley and I hear biochem's not a walk in the park. I just wanted to offer a different take on things.</p>
<p>Fair is nothing, i do not and have not attended UCR. I am stating facts. MY gf was a bio major at UCR and i can attest to the fact that it is competitive and the grading curve is harsh. If your look back some, you will notice my post said nearly - something very important in understanding my comment. </p>
<p>I will call someone ignorant when they post ignorant comments. He has continued to post about UCR in this format - I heard from my friends, i have heard, my friends have said...etc. Need i say more about his postings and their relation to what his friends say and the rumors he helps pass. That is ignorance, if it is not, tell me what is. </p>
<p>Allowing you in as a science major in now way means the science classes will be less harsh and competitive. I can attest about the similarities between UCSD, UCI, UCR, USC, and UCLA. Although there are differences, the required effort and ability to receive good grades at either of these schools is NEARLY the same. FOCUS ON NEARLY please. If do not have experience with this, why comment? I in now way like UCR, but i will defend it against those that speak about the rumors they have heard as if their were actual facts.</p>
<p>"I will call someone ignorant when they post ignorant comments. He has continued to post about UCR in this format - I heard from my friends, i have heard, my friends have said...etc. Need i say more about his postings and their relation to what his friends say and the rumors he helps pass. That is ignorance, if it is not, tell me what is. "</p>
<p>Since you do not attend UCR and have not attended UCR, how you know about the difficulty of science majors at UCR is the same as how s/he knows it. You heard from your gf at UCR that science is hard; you hear from your friends from UCSD, UCI, UCR, USC, and UCLA that sciences are hard. What makes the things you hear "more" correct?</p>
<p>Just because you use the word "attest" doesn't mean what you heard is true or anything that you say is of more significance than what s/he says. In the end, it's the same: you don't go there, you heard it from other people, just like s/he did.</p>
<p>I was on the campus everyday, i was in the classes and i have even taken the tests</p>
<p>And i have no clue how UCR is? She drags me along everywhere. </p>
<p>And how do i know about the other schools. Well, lets see, i am the go to man when it comes to needing help for biology, ochem, etc. I have seen the material each of the schools test on, i have been in some of the classes and i know about their grading curves.I have been reading (sometimes actually studying out of boredom) this material since literally 6th grade. I hear nothing, this is what i have experienced If it is something i heard, i note that inwhat i write. Obviously if i am belittling the comments of those preaching what they heard, then why would i do the same?</p>
<p>
[quote]
Well, lets see, i am the go to man when it comes to needing help for biology, ochem, etc.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>"Go to man" with a 3.1 1750? Gee, Such a mystery why your friends think their schools are hard.</p>
<p>
[quote]
I have seen the material each of the schools test on, i have been in some of the classes and i know about their grading curves.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>o rlllly? How do you know I haven't the same? How 'ignorant' of you to assume such things.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Although there are differences, the required effort and ability to receive good grades at either of these schools is NEARLY the same. FOCUS ON NEARLY please.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I assume all the UCs have about the same avg GPA in their majors (correct me if I'm wrong). An avg student from a top teir UC have shown better academic performance than an avg student from a lower tier UC. Please explain to me if it's not harder, then why are the avg GPAs the same.</p>
<ol>
<li><p>When did i ever post my stats?</p></li>
<li><p>By saying "my friends told me so" already points to what i suspect</p></li>
<li><p>Actually avg GPA varies by school (per major i have no clue)</p></li>
</ol>
<p>
[quote]
3. Actually avg GPA varies by school (per major i have no clue)
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Here, let me help you. In 1996, avg GPAs are 3.1, 2.89, 2.92, 2.86, at Cal, UCR, UCI, UCSB respectively. With exception to Cal, the other three looks pretty similiar to me. </p>
<p>Students admitted to UCSB and UCI have avgs of 3.9 1835. At UCR, it's 3.6 1666. Please explain to me why students have same AVG college gpa among the same schools when it's clear that UCSB students perform better academically before entering college? Did UCR magically motative their students to achieve at a higher level? Did all UCSB students turn lazy? What's the reason for this if the grading and course work is the same? </p>
<p>Source :
<a href="http://gradeinflation.com/%5B/url%5D">http://gradeinflation.com/</a>
<a href="http://www.ucop.edu/news/factsheets/2007/freshman_admit_profile_2007.pdf%5B/url%5D">http://www.ucop.edu/news/factsheets/2007/freshman_admit_profile_2007.pdf</a></p>
<p>Okay, from your same site you provided (xap.com), it shows UCR has a 2.66GPA. BUT SO DOES UCLA. explain please.</p>
<p>then they have the wrong information, and that is the best info i can find, i believe it is around 3.18-3.2 now</p>
<p><a href="http://www.dailybruin.ucla.edu/archives/id/19361/%5B/url%5D">http://www.dailybruin.ucla.edu/archives/id/19361/</a></p>
<p>Or it could possibly be the fact that we are comparing freshman years and entire undergrad populations. It takes time to find what i have previously read.</p>
<p>
[quote]
then they have the wrong information, and that is the best info i can find, i believe it is around 3.18-3.2 now</p>
<p><a href="http://www.dailybruin.ucla.edu/archives/id/19361/%5B/url%5D">http://www.dailybruin.ucla.edu/archives/id/19361/</a></p>
<p>
[/quote]
</p>
<p>So you provided a site that gives wrong information? Are you providing false information again?</p>
<p>
[quote]
Or it could possibly be the fact that we are comparing freshman years and entire undergrad populations. It takes time to find what i have previously read.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Or maybe it could be it's more competitive at UCLA?</p>
<p>Hey look, we have two sites providing that there is no difference in GPA between the two schools. Let's see which one is more credible... two different sites or two consistent sites saying there is no difference. hmmm.</p>
<p>Would you concede to the fact that top tier UCs are more competitive than lower tier ones if we can prove the GPAs are the same?</p>
<p>I would agree that the sites listed for UCR and UCLA would be more credible than XAP as they are from the daily bruin and UCR website. It is near impossible for me to find all the past information, XAP represents what i have seen for UCI - however i am not saying it is 100% accurate</p>
<p>And let me help you with this. Where are the two sites stating their is no difference? The link you provided shows a difference. The links i provided show a difference, and a considerable one at that.(since XAP is suspect, lets take that out and just focus on UCR and UCLA). Show where are these two sites that show no difference?</p>
<p><a href="http://www.gradeinflation.com%5B/url%5D">www.gradeinflation.com</a> wasn't credible enough for you?</p>
<p>Can someone else please chime in on this?</p>
<p>look at 1999 instead of using the 96 figures</p>
<p>So in 1996 there were a difference in the competition level? But when it came to 1999, oh no, UCR's competition catches up to UCLA?</p>
<p>we are talking about average gpa here for current college students, not entering freshman. </p>
<p>do you even remember what is at question here. Competition. We can even go as far as to say the competition as csulb is fierce. In their first semester chem class, one professor routinely gives out only 8 A's per semester do to the difficulty of their program. A girl that got into UCB, UCLA and cornell but could not afford those school took that classs and barely passed with a B.</p>
<p>There is nothing at question here. You're arguing that UCR is at competitve as UCB/UCLA. -_-' what a joke. </p>
<p>
[quote]
barely passed with a B.
[/quote]
?</p>
<p>
[quote]
In their first semester chem class, one professor routinely gives out only 8 A's per semester do to the difficulty of their program.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I took a history class at a CC this summer where the prof gave out 2 As and 6-7B's in two classes. I cruise through the class without reading, skipped a few lectures, and didn't really pay attention when I was in class. I didn't take apush. in fact, I took all my hs history classes during summer school. I ended the class with a B. Does that make the class more competitve than classes at UCLA? hell no. </p>
<p>It's funny how you brought up a girl in your example when you were crying when I shared my friends' experiences.</p>
<p>I think the fact that the colleges that she was accepted to shows in some way that she is an extremely hard worker, unlike yourself. so differences between your experience and hers are apparent.</p>
<p>
[quote]
I think the fact that the colleges that she was accepted to shows in some way that she is an extremely hard worker, unlike yourself. so differences between your experience and hers are apparent.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Your logic shows you're not a very intelligent student. It's apparent, ducy?</p>
<p>then point out my fallacies. </p>
<p>And then think about why i would list accepted colleges. The reason for this should be apparent.</p>