<p>If you're in-state for Cal, go to MIT. This is actually one of the reasons why I'm picking MIT over both Stanford and Cal. This is the time to go somewhere new. Especially as a California resident, if you don't go somewhere different now, you never will.
Also, for EECS MIT is superior to MIT. If you were talking math, I would say you could go either way.
MIT definitely has smaller classes (I took Multivariable calc at cal last semester and was in a 500 seat lecture hall. Generally, there were people left sitting on the steps during exams.)
Berkeley has a really interesting city, but so does Boston/Cambridge. Cambridge is like a very toned-down Berkeley.
Also, unless you're a Reagents scholar, you aren't guarranteed housing at Cal except for your first year. At MIT, you can live on campus all four years.
Either way, you'll probably have a great time.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Also, unless you're a Reagents scholar, you aren't guarranteed housing at Cal except for your first year.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>That was the former poolicy. Berkeley guarantees housing for 2 years now to all admits. But the 2nd year of housing often times tends to be rather mediocre (i.e. a triple in one of the less desirable dorms).</p>
<p>
[quote]
Looking at EECS major.</p>
<p>Differences in research opportunities, course difficulty, course diversity, amount of electives, professor involvement?</p>
<p>Also, how is the support system different, social scene, college city, weather?</p>
<p>Reputation of EECS major? Likelihood of finding fairly good paying jobs? Which would look better to a grad school?</p>
<p>I am offered similar aid packages, and I get to decide between these two. Any opinions would be helpful, thanks
[/quote]
</p>
<p>For your circumstances, I would take MIT in a landslide. It's not even a close call. If you need only 1 reason, it would be the MIT EECS MEng program. It's relatively easy (as far as the standards of MIT go) to get into the MEng program - something like 75% of all EECS undergrads qualify and 65% will enroll. You basically need only a 4.0/5 GPA to be eligible. </p>
<p>Put another way, as long as you are within the top half of your class as an MIT EECS undergrad, you are basically guaranteed admission to engineering grad school. And not just at any scrub grad school - but * back into MIT *. This is one of the strongest "home field advantages" I know of that is available to engineering students at any school. But the program is available only to MIT undergrads. In contrast, it is significantly more difficult to get into the BS/MS EECS program at Berkeley - without a 3.5/4, you probably won't be eligible.</p>
<p><a href="http://www-mtl.mit.edu/%7Epenfield/pubs/meng-report-p.html%5B/url%5D">http://www-mtl.mit.edu/~penfield/pubs/meng-report-p.html</a>
<a href="http://www.eecs.berkeley.edu/FiveYearMS/%5B/url%5D">http://www.eecs.berkeley.edu/FiveYearMS/</a></p>
<p>If you need a second reason, then I would point to the ease of switching majors at MIT. If you decide that you'd just rather study some other engineering instead, or just study a science or math, or even decide that you'd rather just get a Sloan management degree, you are completely free to do that. Nobody is going to stop you - you can declare whatever major you want. </p>
<p>Not so as a Berkeley EECS student. It's not that easy to switch from one engineering major to another, as all of them are impacted. I know plenty of Berkeley engineering students who wanted to switch from one engineering major to another and were denied, and so were forced to stay in a major that they didnt' really want. This happens even if you want to get out of engineering completely. I know some engineering students who were doing poorly and so were desperately tryingto get into the College of Letters & Science and were denied because their GPA was too low (L&S strongly prefers that you have at least a 3.0/4 to switch in, and it's very easy as a Berkeley engineering student to wind up with less than a 3.0/4). Hence, the upshot is that you can end up in the so-called "major trap", which is the worst of both worlds - where, because you are doing poorly in engineering, * you have to stay in engineering *. You would think that those engineering students who are doing poorly ought to be the first ones allowed to leave, but precisely the opposite happens - * those who are doing poorly are precisely the ones who are forced to stay *.</p>
<p>I would choose Berkeley over MIT for undergrad for 3 reasons. #1, money, but this doesn't seem applicable in your case. #2, you have a strong interest in the humanities, but again, this doesn't seem applicable in your case. And #3, you have strong ties to the Bay Area, but again this doesn't seem applicable in your case. </p>
<p>Grad school is a different story. I know plenty of people who turned down MIT for Berkeley for grad school (and vice versa). Undergrad at Berkeley has certain issues that the graduate programs don't share.</p>
<p>and may i respectfully add that berkeley is about 40 miles away from the silicon valley, which hosts the most dynamic job market in the nation for eecs. berkeley grads have extensive influence there and berkeley eecs is very highly regarded. (more than mit eecs, dare i say). but it doesnt mean that come to berkeley will give you a better education than mit. just thats just something to think about.</p>
<p>and i don't believe mit grad programs are necessarily better than berkeley's. it is really hard to make a statement like one is better than another because each school has own specialties.</p>
<p>If you're smart, a Berkeley EECS degree will get you pretty much anywhere.</p>
<p>
[quote]
berkeley eecs is very highly regarded. (more than mit eecs, dare i say).
[/quote]
</p>
<p>That's a pretty strong statement, don't you think? I am not aware of any convincing data that Berkeley EECS is more highly regarded than MIT EECS, particularly at the undergraduate level. </p>
<p>
[quote]
and i don't believe mit grad programs are necessarily better than berkeley's. it is really hard to make a statement like one is better than another because each school has own specialties.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Well, we're not exactly talking about strength of grad programs per se, are we? I believe we're talking about undergrad here.</p>
<p>I bring up the issue of grad programs solely because of the connection to undergrad - that I suspect it's probably * easier * to get into a top EECS grad program from MIT than from Berkeley, if for no other reason, like I said before, MIT offers extraordinarily strong home-field advantage for its undergrads to get into its own MEng program. In other words, an MIT EECS undergrad is almost certainly more likely to get into MIT for EECS graduate school (i.e. the MEng program) than a Berkeley EECS undergrad is likely to get into Berkeley for EECS grad school. So even we were to presume that Berkeley graduate EECS really was better than MIT graduate EECS (a questionable assertion, but let's assume it), who cares if you can't even get into Berkeley for grad EECS?</p>
<p>
[quote]
<a href="http://www.eecs.berkeley.edu/Program...s/s04grads.htm%5B/url%5D">http://www.eecs.berkeley.edu/Program...s/s04grads.htm</a></p>
<p>If you're smart, a Berkeley EECS degree will get you pretty much anywhere.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Yeah, but what happens if you're not that smart? Like I've always said, if you do well at Berkeley, you can do plenty of things. But what happens if you don't do well?</p>
<p>"Yeah, but what happens if you're not that smart? Like I've always said, if you do well at Berkeley, you can do plenty of things. But what happens if you don't do well?"</p>
<p>If you're not that smart, you shouldn't be going to Berkeley....and you definitely shouldn't be going to MIT.</p>
<p>
[quote]
If you're not that smart, you shouldn't be going to Berkeley....and you definitely shouldn't be going to MIT.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Ha! I would argue that MIT is actually * more * forgiving than Berkeley is. For example, if nothing else, at least at MIT, by academic policy, will hide your failing freshman grades. So if you fail a whole bunch of your classes in freshman year, nobody outside of MIT will know that, which means that you can apply to transfer to some other school with a clean slate. But if you go to Berkeley and fail a bunch of classes in freshman year, your academic record is permanently stained for all to see. You can't easily transfer out to a decent school because they will demand to see your Berkeley transcript and will not be impressed when they see your failing marks.</p>
<p>But the bottom line is this . Berkeley can be a * very cold and compassionless * school when you're not doing well. I've seen it happen to a lot of people.</p>
<p>Doing well vs. not doing well in college, particularly in something like engineering, is not always a question of being smart or not smart. College is very different from high school, and plenty of kids who did very well in high school do not do well in a college environment.</p>
<p>The problem is that you can't really tell beforehand whether you are going to be a superstar in college or whether you are going to do poorly, which is one reason it's good to come to MIT -- you don't have to be a superstar in college to get a great job or get into grad school.</p>
<p>@Sakky: I am currently an ece major at Cornell. Does it mean that I cannot apply to MIT for grad school (EECS)?</p>
<p>
[quote]
Sakky: I am currently an ece major at Cornell. Does it mean that I cannot apply to MIT for grad school (EECS)?
[/quote]
</p>
<p>It means you cannot apply to the special MEng EECS program as that program is strictly reserved only for MIT EECS undergrads (hence, the 'home-field advantage' that I am talking about). Instead, if you apply to MIT EECS, you have to apply to the PhD program, which is obviously much harder.</p>
<p>Thank you Sakky! My dream to go to grad school at MIT is way more difficult to attain now. <em>sigh</em></p>
<p>Uhh.. unless there are money problems- anyone smart enough to be admitted to MIT should know the answer. ;)</p>
<p>For prestige in engineering, MIT wins :P</p>
<p>If you have gotten similar aid packages, go to MIT.
MIT is the place where intellectuals from all around the world come to study
Boston is a great place also..</p>
<p>
[quote]
For undergrad, yes, but only a for bit. But for grad school, that's very questionable.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>But we're not talking about grad school in this thread, are we?</p>
<p>
[quote]
You are correct, we're not talking about grad school. But since were talking about prestige, it is not possible to talk about it and segregate/separate ugrad and grad levels because people always view the school's prestige as a whole university. Think of Cambridge U. We all agree it is a prestigious university, right? But do you separate ugrad and grad levels before you think it is prestigious or not? I reckon the answers is no.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Oh, I don't know about that. Seems to me that quite a few organizations successfully separate out grad from undergrad. Many top employers, i.e. consulting and banking firms in particular, seem to understand that such a separation exists. That's why you have more MIT undergrad engineers heading off to high-prestige consulting and banking jobs than do Berkeley undergrad engineers. </p>
<p>
[quote]
My other point was, if you'll have to pay less for a Berkeley engineering degree, which, btw, provides the same opportunities as MIT and Stanford grads do, would it not be wise for you to go there?
[/quote]
</p>
<p>This is a complete irrelevant point for the purposes of this thread. After all, the OP specifically said "I am offered similar aid packages", which leads me to believe that his costs are the same. </p>
<p>
[quote]
Someone posted here the salary data of engineering grads and they show that Berkeley engineering grads are among the highest paid grads. Now, taking that into consideration plus Berkeley's global reputation which is considered a top school, etc, etc... why would you go somewhere else?
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Oh, I don't know - all the reasons I stated? You even said it yourself, MIT is a little more prestigious. Moreover, I am convinced that MIT offers a better undergraduate environment. If nothing else, at least you can switch majors freely while at MIT. You decide that you'd rather major in Sloan management, or some other form of engineering? Fine, go right ahead, nobody is going to stop you. However, at Berkeley, certain majors are impacted, particularly engineering & business, hence you may end up in a major that you don't really want. </p>
<p>
[quote]
For undergrad, MIT is a little bit prestigous, at least according to you and me.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Exactly. So let's turn the question around - why would you want to give up that little edge, if you don't have to, ceteris paribus? </p>
<p>
[quote]
MIT does not have the monopoly anymore.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Uh, who here has ever argued that MIT ever had a "monopoly"? Heck, Berkeley was actually founded * before * MIT. If you look through the history, you will probably find that Caltech became a truly prominent tech school before MIT did (i.e. Caltech had Nobel Prize winners years before MIT ever did). Hence, nobody ever seriously claims that MIT has a "monopoly" on anything.</p>
<p>Go to M.I.T. if you don't like the sun. I went to Berkeley last year during summer and it was darn hotttt~~~.</p>
<p>Although this thread is old, I am writing to inform future college applicants that a degree from the University of California, Berkeley can give as many opportunities as a degree from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology can. First of all, it would be necessary to state first that MIT and UC Berkeley are on the same tier when it comes to engineering. Although some may suggest that MIT’s prestige in the field of engineering is more dominant, it is certainly arguable as the difference between the 1st ranked program (MIT) and 2nd ranked program (Berkeley; as well as Stanford) is more or less small. </p>
<p>Sakky’s claims regarding the undergraduate environment at Berkeley are valid to a certain extent. However, Berkeley’s undergraduate program is on par with that of MIT and with that of other top tier universities such as Harvard, Princeton, and Stanford. As one of the world’s most preeminent research institutions, the Undergraduate Research Apprenticeship Program (URAP) at UC Berkeley helps students to find research opportunities in their desired fields such as Electrical Engineering, Economics, Business, Biology, Chemistry, and Psychology. These research opportunities are available every semester. </p>
<p>As for EECS, the major is simply top class. A Berkeley student with a EECS degree can easily get his or her desired position at his or her desired workplace, assuming that the person has a good GPA (>3.2). Corporations such as Apple, HP, Dell, Boeing, Accenture, JP Morgan Chase, Goldman Sachs, and Google regularly hire Berkeley students. Some Berkeley engineers decide to pursue graduate school at places such as Stanford, MIT, and Cornell.</p>
<p>Yes, a few students do occasionally tend to fall behind. These students probably cannot get the same prestigious job positions as most people do at Berkeley. But think of it this way: You are at college and you are in charge of your life. If you make serious mistakes in life, life will not be tolerant. You must face the consequences. College is about preparing for the life ahead. So yes, a small number of students fail the course because they are silly and are not prudent enough to make the right decisions. The University of California, Berkeley will help you when in need but it will not baby-sit you for entirety.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>That’s one heck of an assumption, particularly as the Berkeley EECS grading guidelines specifically instructs EECS faculty to assign typical grades between 2.7-2.9. A student earning a 3.2+ will therefore be performing significantly above average. </p>
<p>A typical GPA for courses in the lower division is 2.7…A typical GPA for courses in the upper division is 2.9.</p>
<p>[Grading</a> Guidelines for Undergraduate Courses | EECS at UC Berkeley](<a href=“http://www.eecs.berkeley.edu/Policies/ugrad.grading.shtml]Grading”>http://www.eecs.berkeley.edu/Policies/ugrad.grading.shtml)</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Just a few? As stated above, the average student is going to be earning between a 2.7-2.9 engineering GPA. Such a student would then not even be able to apply to many of the better engineering companies or grad schools, which often times implement minimum GPA cutoffs at 3.0. Note, simply being able to apply is hardly any guarantee that you will receive the offer, but they can’t even apply. {Heck, even if you could apply, let’s face it, a 2.7-2.9 GPA ain’t exactly going to impress anybody.} </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Then let me put it to you this way. MIT offers an ‘adjustment period’ during its freshman year during which all failing grades are deliberately excluded from the external transcript. MIT sophomores are also provided with the option to designate a course as ‘exploratory’ which allows them to view the final course grade they receive and then decide whether to retain the course or convert it to Listener (which is effectively a retroactive drop). The policy was implemented specifically to provide students with the freedom to take courses outside of their comfort zone without overly fearing a poor grade. </p>
<p>These policies are intended to help you adjust to MIT’s teaching and grading methods and the workload without having to worry about accumulating a grade point average (GPA). Many students use the freedom of hidden grades in the first year to adjust to the demands of MIT and to take some educational risks</p>
<p>[MIT</a> Freshman Class: Right Now-Freshman Grading and Credit Limits](<a href=“http://web.mit.edu/firstyear/2013/subjects/grading.html]MIT”>http://web.mit.edu/firstyear/2013/subjects/grading.html)</p>
<p>[Sophomore</a> Exploratory Option: MIT Office of the Registrar](<a href=“http://web.mit.edu/registrar/reg/grades/exploratory.html]Sophomore”>Registration & Academics | MIT Registrar)</p>
<p>But Theophilius, according to your philosophy, MIT should dispense with those policies. After all, as you said, you are in college and therefore in charge of your life, and since life doesn’t tolerate serious mistakes, you should face the consequences. Therefore, silly and imprudent MIT freshmen and sophomores who fail their courses should be punished for their immaturity, for after all, MIT should not be babysitting anybody, right? But that’s not what happens. Is then the implication that MIT doesn’t produce prepared graduates?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>If they are on the same tier, then that begs the question of why MIT freshmen engineers are allowed to shield their failing grades, but Berkeley freshmen engineers are not. </p>
<p>Otherwise, I think we have to admit that we’ve uncovered a rational reason why somebody might prefer MIT over Berkeley. While I might fail as a freshman at either school, at least MIT allows me to hide those grades.</p>