<p>For grad school, there is no comparing any public school to Berkeley. The only school that compares with Cal for overall quality of grad school is Stanford, as they are both tops in everything (just shear quantity of top 5/10 grad programs). Then you have the MITs and Harvards who are top in most everything they do. </p>
<p>Undergrad is different. If you want to get a PhD, then Berkeley is the best to goto. If you are looking for specific types of work, it may be of no advantage over another school. I work for a large aerospace company in california and last year for their interview day, they had like 10 Purdue people, 8 Michigan people, several Illinois, many CalPoly SLO, and only 2 Berkeley students interviewing. I work with only one fellow bear, but like 5 Boilers and Wolverines. This in a team of about 20. </p>
<p>So, for this company, an undergrad degree from Cal is not definately a league ahead. Undergrad anywhere isn't as clear cut as grad school. At grad school, it's the profs that matter. In undergrad, you're basically gonna learn the same things wherever you go. I'm not saying this because I went to a crappy undergrad either, they were top 5 in my major when I was there. Just saying, undergrad quality is harder to quantify.</p>
<p>I don't argue that among the top Public Universities, CAL, UCLA, UV, UCSD, UCD, UT, Michigan are great. If you are rating excellent public schools you would not want to leave out the Public Colleges at Cornell Univeristy. Cornell's College of Agriculture and Life Sciences in particular for biology, business and other assorted schools. The public colleges at Cornell also allow students to take courses at the private schools at Cornell. You can even duel major between colleges although I think that would impact tuition.</p>
<p>"Do any other states have this situation, where two state university are within 20 minutes of each other, probably even closer if all transit goes right."</p>
<p>Virginia does. W&M and Christopher Newport are ~20 miles apart by highway.</p>
<p>... if you want to consider graduate schools, I should hope Berkeley would be higher than UVA. Afterall, it's way bigger. Bigger = more programs.</p>
<p>Eastern Michigan University and the University of Michigan are within 10 miles of each other. I also think that there are many UCs and CSUs within 20 minutes of each other in the LA area.</p>
<p>Kind of a bump... but I stumbled upon this. University of Minnesota's newly appointed provost Tom Sullivan speaks about the top public universities and what Minnesota aspires to be within the next decade.</p>
<p>
[quote]
What are the top universities in the U.S. now?</p>
<p>The University of California, Berkeley; UCLA; the University of Michigan; the University of Wisconsin; and the University of Virginia. Those really are the leading public universities. We're right in there amongst that group.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>
[quote]
Which are the most distinguished three that we want to be a part of?</p>
<p>The two most prominent are Berkeley and the University of Michigan. Over time, that may change, but we will be on that list of them over the course of the decade.
<p>Well, the reason why he'd say that is the same reason you're bias towards UT. It's a regional thing and in Minnesota, top students go to Madison over UM because there is reciprocity between the states. Therefore, it has a great reputation in Minnesota.</p>
<p>I don't think Wisconsin is <em>better</em> than Texas or UNC, but it's for sure in the same peer group, that I believe UCLA and William and Mary are in. I'm glad though, that you Kcirsch, a prestigious individual on the collegeconfidential boards has the authority to call the provost of a internationally recognized, major research university, an idiot. Minnesota is actually highly ranked in several fields, namely law and chemical eng., political science, etc.</p>
<p>I would say, though, that for many fields Wisconsin is better than UNC. Several friends from Atlanta (I go to UW) picked Wisc over UNC for that reason. Two were chemistry and one was physics. I am political science and economics, another set of fields in which Madison has some of the finest departments in the country. There is a reason why despite slightly less competitive admission standards (thousands of students in each class @ madison have 1400+ SATs and 30s or above on the ACT, so I stress slightly) that Madison remains 32nd in the US news, an abysmal 3, count them, THREE, spots lower than the elite University of North Carolina, which is 29th.
/sarcasm</p>
<p>Well, maybe the general public doesn't think so, but higher ed administrators and faculty have a staggering amount of respect for Wisconsin. I don't know if it's the research coming out of there, the PhDs they are graduating, or the faculty they are wooing and recruiting, but Wisconsin is regarded as an excellent school by other publics. Michigan regards it as a peer.</p>
<p>Or, as some of you may put it, our provost is just as big an idiot as the Minnesota provost. Quite a judgment indeed.</p>
<p>its really not about the inclusion of Wisconsin into his list of elite publics, its more the exclusion of Texas and moreso, UNC. And as for bias, I have no regional bias because im canadian. In fact, from where im sitting, i should have a bias towards Wisconsin. Nevertheless, I have no regional bias towards UNC or Texas or against Wisconsin, I just believe that UNC is as good if not better than Wisconsin and it shouldve been included in his list. As for the "abysmal 3 spots", UNC is an "abysmal 3 spots" below UCLA...does this mean UNC is better than UCLA? Most likely not. It just means that UNC is comparable with UCLA on many levels...which i think is precisely the point you were making about Wisconsin and UNC.</p>
<p>Transfer,
Your comments are littered with bias towards your school so you shouldn't be so quick to judge my comments. I said nothing negative about Minn so I don't know where that came from, and I certainly don't have regional bias towards UNC as I live in Texas.</p>
<p>First, if you have no regional bias, that's fine. Alright I'll believe you. However it does explain why Minnesota provosts will be quick to call Wisconsin a peer, as opposed to UNC. Just so you know I was talking about Texas students supporting UT-Austin, but, whatever.</p>
<p>Second, I mentioned the quality of Minnesota to give credibility to the provost and disproving his "idiocy".</p>
<p>Third, I think Wisconsin and UNC are peers, just that in some fields, Wisconsin <em>is</em> better (just as in others UNC might be), so it's not an outrageous claim to have Wisconsin on the list. </p>
<p>Fourth, as to the inclusion of some but not others, well I'm not here to defend that, and I don't necessarily agree with his list.</p>
<p>Fifth, of course I'm bias... it's my school. But everything I said can be backed with rankings and I don't try to explain things away as people being "idiots".</p>
<p>10 best in no order.
UC Berkeley
UC Davis
UC Irvine
UC Los Angeles
UC Merced
UC Riverside
UC San Diego
UC San Francisco
UC Santa Barbara
UC Santa Cruz</p>
<p>StealthVoyage: Though I'm proud of the University of California, not all of them make the top 10. And UCSF is a graduate (medical) school, not for undergrads.</p>
<p>And California has plenty of public universities that are really close from each other since we have so many (10 UC's, 22 CSU's)</p>