<p>The fact is that most in-state residents already paid much for it. To claim that people who PAID for it shouldn't get preferential treatment over those who DIDN'T is quite ridiculous. It's like blaming a congressman for trying to follow the wishes of his local district. The school was built, operated and paid for by the state and its residents. It's like contributing money to a political cause only to have the candidate treat you like just another one of the non-active voters; THAT is unfair.</p>
<p>Hell, if you think that's unfair, why not complain about the obvious distaste for international students that almost every school, even private ones, seem to possess? No tax dollars excuse there.</p>
<p>Theres no question they should recieve in-state tuition. But should the admissions bar be substantially lowered?
[/quote]
</p>
<p>This is another topic but i'll field it anyway. </p>
<p>that's how state U's work and function. Lesser prestigious State Us do not require high entrance, BUT naturally, prestigious State Us do require very high entrance. This also apply to State Us in other countries. For instance in Japan, the University of Tokyo requires very high entrance level for foreign nationals. Same with the University of the Philippines, National University of Singapore, etc...</p>
<p>Sansai, please tell us again how well the International School of Manila fare in admissions in 2006? How many students were accepted at Berkeley again? How many at Harvard?</p>
<p>^^
Not entirely accurate. You could say the same thing about Duke's basketball program. Some schools have used their name-recognition from sports to improve their institutions over time. Duke and ND are both elite universities. The football program may of helped in getting them to the top, but if it were to be removed ND would still be very prestigous.</p>
<p>The only thing valid about the OP's list of undergrads is they are all vastly superior to NYU.</p>
<p>Notre Dame excels in exactly the opposite areas Berkeley does. Combine Cal's weaknesses (size, endowment per student, selectivity, lack of undergrad focus, alumni giving, etc) with Notre Dame's strengths (the opposite areas) and you see why they are similarly ranked. </p>
<p>IMO:
Underranked: Brown (USNEWS does nt account for its tremendous recruiting or placement)
Overranked: WUSTL (recruiting and grad placement + academics not up to its ranking, and the areas its ranked highly (like selectivity and faculty ratio) are altered to boost its rank.</p>
<p>Don't you people have better things to discuss than which school is "overrated?" Is this the only way you can stroke your pathetic little egos? GET...OVER...IT.</p>
<p>You can't simply transfer everything about Berkeley's grad program to its undergrad program. Perhaps you should look at Berkeley's relatively poor med school placement (only 55-60%, just barely above the national average) to get a dose of reality. FYI: schools like Duke, JHU, and WashU have >80%. Good day!</p>
<p>Orange Isle - Duke is also on the East Coast, and has more impact in terms of grad placement...plus Duke is better academically as in it attracts stronger students - all these things give it a leg up on ND aside from sports</p>
<p>Sansai: You've yet to mention ANY data or even logic as to why you think Berkeley is so great. Cal does enjoy nice placement on the West Coast but over on the East, the results are lackluster. The complaints that come out of Cal ugrad are not very desirable either and neither are the insecure students like you.</p>
UC Berkeley is way a better ACADEMIC institution than :</p>
<p>Duke University(NC)
Dartmouth College(NH)
Cornell University(NY)
Washington University in St. Louis
Northwestern University(IL)
Brown University(RI)
Rice University(TX)
Vanderbilt University(TN)
Emory University(GA)
University of Notre Dame(IN)
Carnegie Mellon University(PA)
[/quote]
</p>
<p>If we're talking undergrad, I think Duke/Dartmouth beats Berkeley, toss-up between Berkeley and Cornell/WUSTL/NU/Brown/Rice, and Berkeley is probably better than Vandy/Emory/ND/CMU in general. Again, personal opinion.</p>
<p>
[quote]
My God,</p>
<p>Don't you people have better things to discuss than which school is "overrated?" Is this the only way you can stroke your pathetic little egos? GET...OVER...IT.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Apparently we don't. We're bored. :)</p>
<p>
[quote]
Oh lord not another UC Berkeley discussion.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Haha, sorry about that. They do seem to proliferate on these boards. Okay, back on topic:</p>
<p>I agree with Sternman87 (I can't believe I just said that!) on U Chicago, Notre Dame, Emory, and Vandy. U Chicago is good, but I don't think it should be #9...probably somewhere between 10 and 15 is more fitting. The other three I think should be below the top publics, Berkeley/UVa and maybe Michigan, but that's personal opinion.</p>
<p>
[quote]
FYI: schools like Duke, JHU, and WashU have >80%. Good day!
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I think one popular counterargument is that while Berkeley allows everyone to apply, schools like JHU often "screen" their applicants and discourage those who have little chance from applying, thus superficially raising the acceptance rates.</p>
<p>I was speaking of Haas's comparatively poor placement. Many schools ranked along with Cal do "pretty well in PhD programs in all schools". </p>
<p>Sternman was probably a bit too forward in his post but we should all realize and respect each other's opinions. For example I respect Vicci's opinions but of course he is a Cal student. Personally I'd take any of those schools over Cal for ugrad but that's MY personal opinion based on the environment/education of Cal.</p>
<p>Sansai, please tell us again how well the International School of Manila fare in admissions in 2006? How many students were accepted at Berkeley again? How many at Harvard?
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Like what you sent to me through private message</p>
<p>Class of 2006 College Matriculation by GPA Quintile
Quintile 1
4.38-4.02</p>
<p>Ateneo de Manila Univ (3)
Boston College
Boston University
Brown University (3)
Claremont McKenna College
Columbia University
Duke University
Georgetown University
London School of Economics
Massachusetts Inst of Tech
Smith College
Sophia University
The Royal Veterinary College
Univ of British Columbia (2)
Univ of California, LA
Universiteit Utrecht
University College London
University of Bath
University of Chicago
University of Virginia
Yale University (2)
Yonsei University</p>
<p>from what i know, 2 of the 3 ateneo de Manila students eventually transferred to US schools.</p>
<p>I bet that if we were to use student complaints as a metric of program quality, we could probably skew results at any school to show that it's awful.</p>
<p>And the impersonal environment is problematic at all big research unis, not just Cal.</p>
<p>I'm guessing you are not reading the "my opinion" part? When did I ever say anything about program quality? PS: The same complaints don't happen at Stanford btw which has one of the happiest student bodies and lowest transfer out rates for a large research university.</p>