Stanford or Berkeley

<p>Alright Everybody this is enough,</p>

<pre><code> These two Universities are comparable in nearly every area except undergraduate education. For everyone knocking Stanford it consistently ranks at the top for undergraduate education, and has 28 graduate programs in the top 10 nationally.
What I really don't understand is how anyone can say Berkeley is not of a calibre equivalent to Stanford (or any other school in the country for that matter). If you check US News you'll find that 35 of Berkeley's 36 graduate programs are in the top ten. That's more than ANY other University in the country. Stanford comes in second and Harvard third.

NRC faculty rankings based on publication, awards, and memberships (academy of science etc.) Places Berkeley as the #1 most prestigious faculty in the country in several areas. Its English, History, Sociology, Psychology, departments are all in the top three. (if not first). Until you've lived in Berkeley and Palo Alto and attended both universities or done extensive research on them you really shouldn't be making such bold statements.

</code></pre>

<p>Stanford has 31 distinguished programs
Berkeley has 35 distinguished programs</p>

<p>Berkeley Engineering depending on the year is first, second, or third. Sometimes Stanford is first, sometimes Berkeley is, but the fact is that they're comparable. Acceptance rates for graduate school are comparable as well.</p>

<p>Alumni from both universities have done amazing things.<br>
Stanford: Founders of Google and SUN, The Gap Inc, and dozens of others
Berkeley: CEO of Intel (more than one), Founder of Kaiser Permanente, President of Wells Fargo, Several generations of the Levi Strauss family, Hearst, and dozens of others.</p>

<p>I don't have more of Stanfords stats on the tip of my tongue but I have them in my computer somewhere. </p>

<p>It's true that undergraduate education at Berkeley often involves enormous classes, and that you will experience significantly smaller class sizes (on average) at Stanford. They have far more financial resources.</p>

<p>Keep in mind however, that you have outstanding resources to exploit at Berkeley if you are "cut throat". You have the entire national laboratory which is practically connected to campus, and it's extremely easy to obtain excellent research positions. </p>

<p>The controversy here is so heated because the line is so blurry. There is no blatantly obvious distinction that clearly makes one universally superior. However only someone who is not familiar with the national academic community could possibly discount the phenomenal research and academic prestige at Berkeley.</p>

<p>I think it's obvious that Stanford does not need any defense as it already hold the prestige common amongst private universities with endowments over 10 Billion dollars. Of course if we're merely discussing coffee talk name brand recognition amongs the general educationally ignorant population the wealthy and most selective universities will stick out. If we decide to delve into the actual peer assessment scores, academic expert opinions, quality of research, publications etc. then Berkeley consistently comes out if not at the top in the top three, no matter what indicator you use. US News, Princeton Review, Urbana-Champaign, Check out THES (Times higher education), or the Tokyo rankings. </p>

<pre><code>As someone who has studied extensively at both I can tell you that as an undergraduate at UC Berkeley I was miserable because of how rigorous, large, and and difficult the classes were. Grades are also extremely deflated. However, I was able to occupy several research positions and build a phenomenal resume. It was not difficult to obtain positions at the top labs and national lab and even receive a research fellowship at NASA as an undergraduate.
I'm sure at Stanford as an undergraduate grades are more inflated, and the environment is far more comfortable although rigorous. At the graduate level I think the calibre of both are evident.
</code></pre>

<p>
[quote]
And the survey seems to disprove the popular refrain that Cal is a safety school for Stanford rejects — one-third of the respondents who applied to Cal said they were not admitted

[/quote]
</p>

<p>This I would like to investigate further. While I don't dispute that this may be a true statement, I think it may also be misleading. What I would posit may be happening is that a lot of out-of-state students are applying to both Berkeley and Stanford, and then getting into Stanford, but not Berkeley. This should not be surprising considering the fact that it is significantly more difficult to get into Berkeley out-of-state than in-state, and in fact may be more difficult than getting into Stanford. </p>

<p>What the survey should be doing is making clear that that 1/3 who are getting into Stanford but not Berkeley are in-state residents, or at least, proportionately in-state to the same degree that Berkeley applicants tend to be in-state. Otherwise, you are not making a fair apples-to-apples comparison. </p>

<p>But in any case, I don't know if that's what's happening. That's why I'd like to get more information.</p>

<p>
[quote]
As someone who has studied extensively at both I can tell you that as an undergraduate at UC Berkeley I was miserable because of how rigorous, large, and and difficult the classes were. Grades are also extremely deflated. However, I was able to occupy several research positions and build a phenomenal resume. It was not difficult to obtain positions at the top labs and national lab and even receive a research fellowship at NASA as an undergraduate.
I'm sure at Stanford as an undergraduate grades are more inflated, and the environment is far more comfortable although rigorous. At the graduate level I think the calibre of both are evident.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>REd&Gold, I think you are right on target. The Berkeley graduate programs are what the Berkeley undergraduate program should be. The graduate programs at Berkeley are so good that you just have to wonder why can't the Berkeley undergraduate program be like that?</p>

<p>Sakky,</p>

<pre><code> I think the only real answer is because of size. If the classes were the same size of Stanford's and the curve was a little more pleasant than the playing field would be leveled. Undergraduates are still taking classes with nobel laureates and authorities in their field. You still learn at least as much as anyone attending a top five, but there are no resources for coddling. If you don't get your work done there is no person who comes to your aid, helps you out, or.... even notices (often). In order for Berkeley to manage to maintain it's undergraduate peer assessment score (which is high enough to put it among HYPMS if class size, alumni giving, and other stats weren't computed) it must grade very harshly in most cases (particularly the natural sciences and engineering. If Berkeley allowed the level of inflation seen by more exclusive private universities it would lose the academic prestige it holds amongst the leaders of higher education across the country.
</code></pre>

<p>Are there lots of party ppl and stuff in stanford? or is stanford more of a study based community?</p>

<p>Hey Nick_Adams, even though your thread got taken over, where did you end up deciding??? oh, haha just realized your name is a hemingway reference, isn't it?</p>

<p>But can't we agree on one universally accepted truth...U$C is the one that really sucks! :) :) :)</p>

<p>Am I the only one that thinks USC isn't completely bad? Look at their film major, an incredibly selective department (and considered by everything that i've heard to be as good if not better than NYU film), their arts majors, their engineering, international relations (the first such school in the country). Even their "regular" majors are pretty solid. The campus is gorgeous, and the surrounding area is bad, but not so bad as people portray it to be. I don't know . . .</p>

<p>Haha, I hate USC, but it's a rather uninformed hatred -- my dad went to UCLA :)</p>

<p>lol, you're right that we should exclude usc film school.</p>

<p>my dad was in the stanford band and they hate usc, so i guess that's where it comes from.......</p>