Message from Berkeley Chancellor About #2 Ranking

Colleges & Universities A-Z University of California - Berkeley
1

<p>In the first ever THES ranking, Berkeley placed #2 worldwide. Here is the Chancellor’s message regarding this. </p>

<p><a href=“http://www.berkeley.edu/news/berkeleyan/2004/12/01_rankings.shtml[/url]”>http://www.berkeley.edu/news/berkeleyan/2004/12/01_rankings.shtml</a></p>

<p>

</p>

<p>I like this new Chancellor a lot. He seems like a good successor to the seventh Hokage… I mean UC Berkeley Chancellor Chang Lin Tien. Thank you for walking around Dwinelle and always asking us students how we are doing, how our studies were going, if we are having any difficulty, and for genuinely caring about your students. May his soul rest in peace.</p>

2

<p>The only accurate ranking would be:</p>

<ol>
<li>Harvard</li>
<li>Stanford</li>
<li>Yale</li>
<li>Princeton</li>
<li>MIT</li>
<li>Caltech</li>
<li>Columbia</li>
<li>Duke</li>
<li>Dartmouth</li>
<li>University of Pennsylvania</li>
<li>Brown</li>
<li>Cornell</li>
<li>UC Berkeley</li>
<li>Johns Hopkins</li>
<li>University of Chicago</li>
<li>Northwestern</li>
</ol>

<p>As you can see, I gave Berkeley a fair spot above the #21 ranking given by US News but below the overinflated #2 ranking of some British tabloid.</p>

3

<p>Also, my ranking is based on this simple question: "Would most people choose the schools ranked higher than the schools ranked lower?" I think most people would choose Yale over Duke, MIT over UPenn, Stanford over Berkeley, and Berkeley over Northwestern.</p>

4

<p>Rooster08:</p>

<p>I don't know, this simple question you ask: "Would most people choose the schools ranked higher than the schools ranked lower?" The answer would more likely than not rely heavily on the school's repuation.</p>

<p>That being said, the THES rankings place 50% of their emphasis on peer rankings, or what could informally be called "reputation", which would classify under your particular categorization of schools. So aren't you just finding a different list using the same methods as THES?</p>

5

<p>Every list has it's own methods. In the end, no matter what funky formula you use, it will be no more objective than my list. Deciding how much to weight reputation, SAT scores, or selectivity percentages is already subjective in of itself.</p>

6

<p>California1600, I think you should head the cheerleading team for the Bears. :)</p>

7

<br>


<br>

<p>My friend, I was on campus 1 week after the elections getting the Political Science, African American, Sociology, Math, Statistics, PEIS professors information about election fraud. No one knew anything about it, and one week later Berkeley released this:</p>

<p><a href="http://www.prnewswire.com/cgi-bin/stories.pl?ACCT=109&STORY=/www/story/11-18-2004/0002462583&EDATE=%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.prnewswire.com/cgi-bin/stories.pl?ACCT=109&STORY=/www/story/11-18-2004/0002462583&EDATE=&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

<p>Its the only school to go forward with this study. Everyone else is afraid of political ramifications. Not Berkeley. Berkeley is the best school in the country for research and activism. If any university or student is gonna save this country or this world one day, its gonna be someone from Berkeley.</p>

8

<br>


<br>

<p>School admissions is also subjective. However, recognition of scientific achievement (citations/faculty) is certainly less subjective than what your favorite color is. In fact, it is probably the only way to distinguish worldwide university rankings and perceptions. Thank you so much for providing justification for the THES ranking. I swear, that was so easy, you did it on purpose.</p>

9

<p>"Also, my ranking is based on this simple question: "Would most people choose the schools ranked higher than the schools ranked lower?" I think most people would choose Yale over Duke, MIT over UPenn, Stanford over Berkeley, and Berkeley over Northwestern."</p>

<p>This is not an accurate measurement; for example, I believe that generally Yale will have more potential applicants than MIT (we have much more liberal arts people in the states). Does that mean Yale is better than MIT? Of course not. The better way to rank the prestige of a school is by considering the general profile of the admitted students, the selectivity in respective fields, the faculty strength, course workload, and peer assessment, again, in respective fields.</p>

<p>Hence it is a fallacious statement for example to say Yale is better than MIT because it receives more applicant. To put it bluntly, how could Yale be possibly more prestigious than MIT (except if you view it as a 'blue blood' school), if we refer to MIT for most of the time when we talk abt 'very clever' people and 'geniuses' in states.</p>

10

<p>"Does that mean Yale is better than MIT?"</p>

<p>Yale is ranked higher than MIT because Yale is an actual UNIVERSITY and not just a narrowly specialized tech school. There's a reason that MIT and Caltech are insitutes and not universities. If you ask me, all institutes should be put in their own category like Liberal Arts Colleges. But since almost every other ranking puts them in the same category as universities, I put them in the same category as well. </p>

<p>Of course MIT is prestigous, but becasue of its narrow focus it isn't as prestigious as Yale or Harvard or Stanford or Princeton.</p>

11

<p><quote>Of course MIT is prestigous, but becasue of its narrow focus it isn't as prestigious as Yale or Harvard or Stanford or Princeton.</quote></p>

<p>I'm not quite sure I follow this statement. MIT isn't as prestigious because they don't have architecture, Women's Studies, Music, etc. programs? Pardon me if for my ignorance, but I've always associated prestige to being the best out there in a particular field, not having the most breadth in as many fields possible. I think you may be grasping at straws here.</p>

<p>Correct me if I'm wrong, but the point you're trying to make is that your rankings are the "The only accurate ranking", and you cite that yours is as objective as they come. I can see many flaws in that thinking, most of which we can all see. </p>

<p>You say most people would pick a school higher on the list; what constitutes a person? High school seniors? CEO's? Homeless bums on the street?</p>

<p>You give no mention of how you came up with this list; could it be that you're just basing it off of your own opinions and musings? How is that even remotely objective? Especially considering that you currently attend one of the schools in the mix?</p>

<p>No one seems to consider the fact that even though MIT may be a specialized school, a student can very easily cross-register with the numerous colleges in Boston, including that other college in Cambridge. It's not as if MIT students are unable to take Female Sexuality 101 at Harvard if they wanted to. </p>

<p>I could go on, but I think we get the point.</p>

<p>Ultimately, and I don't mean to flame here, your ranking makes a lot less sense than the THES, US News, and even Princeton Review rankings...well, maybe not the Princeton Review rankings.</p>

12

<p>I never said my rankings were subjective. In fact, I implied that it was 100% subjective. What I tried to say was that US News and that British tabloid ranking are also nearly 100 percent subjective. Anyone can tweek the numbers to make whatever list they want to. At least my list (I hope) sort of reflects what most people's opinion's are. Of course my list has flaws.....I came up with it in 1 or 2 minutes. But most people do not think Berkeley is the second best university in the world, or that Dartmouth is the 113th university in America even behind UMass. </p>

<ol>
<li>Harvard</li>
<li>Stanford</li>
<li>Yale</li>
<li>Princeton</li>
<li>MIT</li>
<li>Caltech</li>
<li>Columbia</li>
<li>Duke</li>
<li>Dartmouth</li>
<li>University of Pennsylvania</li>
<li>Brown</li>
<li>Cornell</li>
<li>UC Berkeley</li>
<li>Johns Hopkins</li>
<li>University of Chicago</li>
<li>Northwestern</li>
</ol>

<p>Though I haven't taken endowment or admission rates into account, would the ranking above be any more concrete? I could easily construct that exact list I made above by tweaking how I weight each statistic. In fact, I really think US News makes the list first and then justifies it afterwards. How am I being any different?</p>

13

<p>The international rankings are for graduate programs and favor the sciences. Your ranking based on where people would go if they had their choice would indeed favor these grad programs at Berkeley (many of the chemistry and engineering profs at high-level institutions did their PhDs or post-docs at there). The emphasis on research output is also why MIT and Caltech are ranked so high and places that focus more on their undergrad programs (like Brown) are ranked lower. I'm pretty certain these rankings have nothing to do with undergraduate programs.</p>

14

<p>I agree with Pookdogg.</p>

<p>I believe rooster's ranking list was pretty similar to The Economist's list. However, rooster, I think your notion of prestige is slightly off. Generally, the notion of prestige is often associated the 'WOW' factor. Now do you really think, people going to Yale get more 'wow' than they who go to MIT, or Stanford's students get more 'wow' than Caltech students?</p>

15

<br>


<br>

<p>There is an allotment for Student/Faculty ratios. Which would cover the entire univeristy, including undergraduates. Also peer review rankings would cover large faculties that are devoted to undergraduate teaching as well as ones that are devoted to only graduate teaching. </p>

<p>Also, most of the prestige associated with the schools are a result of years of biased US News rankings that favor private schools over public. Public schools in most countries outperform private schools, and it should not be assumed that private schools are necessarily superior in rankings. The best way to measure academic excellence should be taken note of.</p>

16

<p>OMG rooster your rankings are the worst ever. </p>

<p>UChicago should be ranked much higher. So should Berkeley. Duke, Dartmouth, Brown, princeton should all drop 3-4 spots each. </p>

<p>Anyways, THES has way more credibility than you.
Well since I have a higher SAT score than Rooster, here are my personal subjective rankings purely for undergraduate.</p>

<p>California1600 Educational Supplemental Rankings - First Edition </p>

<ol>
<li>Harvard</li>
<li>Stanfurd</li>
<li>Yale</li>
<li>MIT </li>
<li>Cal Tech</li>
<li>Berkeley</li>
<li>Princeton</li>
<li>University of Chicago</li>
<li>Columbia</li>
<li>University of Pennsylvania</li>
<li>UCLA</li>
<li>Cornell</li>
<li>Northwestern</li>
<li>John Hopkins</li>
<li>University of Michigan- Ann Arbor</li>
</ol>

<p>(Clicks on this thread are automatically charged to your credit card)</p>

17

<p>Why are you ranking Berkeley above Princeton, Columbia, and UPenn?</p>

18

<p>I chose Berkeley over UPenn, Columbia, and only applied to Harvard and Yale, didn't think princeton was worth applying to because of the suffocating nature they place on ethnic community activists.</p>

19

<p>Berkeley is definitely higher ranked that U.S. News makes it out to be. This well-written article about U.S. News rankings, by the former Stanford president, has been posted before by someone else, but I will post it here again: <a href="http://www.stanford.edu/dept/pres-provost/president/speeches/961206gcfallow.html%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.stanford.edu/dept/pres-provost/president/speeches/961206gcfallow.html&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

20

<p>California1600: Most people pick Columbia and UPenn over Berkeley. People DEFINITELY pick Princeton over Berkeley. </p>

<p>Veritas949 (a.k.a. Harvard-wannabe): I do agree with you that Berkeley deserves a higher rank than the one US News gives. But it shouldn't be ranked number 2 either. It should be placed under HYPSMC, the ivy leagues, and Duke. You have to admit that being just under Duke is a damn good ranking. Oh and just kidding about the Harvard-wannabe part. :)</p>