<p>Another thing I'd like to point out about rankings:</p>
<p>Going to Harvard to get a PhD in engineering is a terrible idea if you are accepted to Berkeley as well. Why? Berkeley is more likely to get you a top placement in a tenure-track position later.</p>
<p>Sakky, do you remember saying this:</p>
<p>"I would also ask the question of if UCSF is considered to be Berkeley's medical school, then is it fair to say that MIT's law school is considered to be Harvard Law, and MIT's medical school is considered to be Harvard Medical? If not, why not? Is Caltech's medical school = UCLA Med? Again, if not, why not? If Berkeley can supposedly claim UCSF as its medical school, then why not?"</p>
<p>In that instance, you disputed California1600's assertion that Berkeley could claim UCSF as its medical school. However, you wrote that quite a while ago so just to be fair I'm going to let that pass. After all, people's opinions change over time and I'm not going to be anal about it. Let's move on.</p>
<p>Anyway, let's get into my true response. I would argue that UCSF belongs more to Stanford than it does to Berkeley. First of all, Berkeley is not that much closer to San Francisco than Stanford is. In theory the distance from Berk to UCSF is smaller, but you have to remember that Berkeley is across the bay, whereas Stanford and UCSF are on the same penninsula. Going from Stanford to UCSF takes less time than going from Berkeley to UCSF if you take highway 101 or 280. This is especially true in rush hour traffic since there are no tolls, no jams, and no hassles. Also, let me remind you that Stanford Med and UCSF were negotiating a merger in the past. Although the merger did not go through, it is a strong indication that the two schools are in close enough proximity and share similar enough goals to realistically think about becoming one entity. That is a powerful statement in of itself. I never heard much about Berkeley usurping UCSF, and aside from the fact that both are a part of the same UC system, the two schools aren't that intimately connected. I don't see any collaboration going on between Berk and UCSF, and I don't even see that many kids from Berk enrolling in UCSF. If anything, UCSF draws more students from the Stanford undergrad population than it does from the Berkeley one. Even though that is based on the fact that Stanford students are generally more qualified, it doesn't undermine the fact that Stanford has more of a stake in UCSF than Berkeley. </p>
<p>Finally, I'd like to respond to your remark that I was "statistically" confounding things by letting the prestige of the overall institution bias the prestige of the PhD or professional school program. My answer to that is, "why not?" If Berkeley's name is not as prestigious as Stanford's or Yale's, then that's how things are. Berkeley simply isn't as prestigious to the American public as HYPS, even at the graduate school level. That simply proves my point that Berkeley's graduate program still doesnt measure up to the top schools like HYPSMC. If a Berkeley PhD doesn't impress people as much as a Stanford PhD degree or a Yale Law degree, then who cares how highly ranked the Berkeley degree is. As you so often say, it doesn't pass the "smell test" of public acceptance and prestige. It might be ranked #1 on US News, but the majority of people don't really know about that. My question then, is "why?" If Berkeley's PhD programs are ranked so highly, and as you claim, are so superior, why is it that Berkeley is not a prestigious school in the eyes of the American public? If Princeton's graduate program is full of "W's" and "Incompletes," why is Princeton regarded way more highly than Berkeley? You can't say that it is because Princeton has a stronger undergraduate program. Places like Amherst and Williams, which arguably have the strongest undergraduate programs in the nation, are also ignored by the American public. There must be something that the public knows about. Do you know what it is?</p>
<p>Gutrade,</p>
<p>If getting the PhD from Stanford isn't going to get you a good placement in a tenure track position, but Berkeley will, does your rule still stand?</p>
<p>Who cares what the public thinks? I care about where I can get a job!</p>
<p>Does your life revolve around impressing people around the dinner table?</p>
<p>Well im not entirely sure how the ability to get from one to the other is such a factor in determining which school "has" UCSF more than the other, but if you really want to go there, taking BART is infinitely easier than driving a car. In the end its far cheaper since not only do you need to get the car you have to pay for the insurance on it. Remember BART doesnt even get into San Jose, its not even in Warm Springs yet, dont expect it to get down to Palo Alto any time soon. So if the ease of getting from one to the other is such a huge factor, i would argue its easier from Berkeley, or at least equal. Second, if two GRADUATE schools want to merge, great, but how does that make UCSF Stanford's own entity? I would invite you to look up admission statistics, you will find that Stanford and Berkeley students are roughly equal in number, so i wouldnt say that there arent very many students from berkeley going to UCSF, unless you just mean that the number is small in which case i would point out that the total enrollees every year is less than 200.</p>
<p>Secondly, if the American people do not regard Berkeley graduate programs as highly as HYPSMC programs, i would argue that this is not a function of some knowledge that the American people have been let in on, but rather that they are simply ignorant. If you truly believe that Berkeley graduate programs are not as good as those of HYPSMC, then you too are delusional. There are plenty of people you could ask who actually know what they are talking about and they would not say that Cal Graduate programs are not up to snuff. If you want more evidence, consider how many discoveries were made at Cal, how many Nobel Prizes were won, even the cliched Californium...Now sure, other schools certainly have made a profound impact and have many illustrious professors and scientists, but so has Cal. And while i think that the current Administration is full of complete morons when it comes to politics and international policy, one has to wonder why they entrust huge grants to the Graduate programs at UC Berkeley and UC Santa Cruz as part of the US nuclear weapons research programs.</p>
<p>"Who cares what the public thinks? I care about where I can get a job!"
"Does your life revolve around impressing people around the dinner table?"</p>
<p>I care what the public thinks, because like it or not, the public is the most important entity period. By claiming that the public doesn't matter, you guys are simply being sheltered and elitist. Who's in a bubble now? Do you think that your boss is somehow super-educated, sophisticated, and qualified? In more cases than not, your boss is going to be dummer than you, more ignorant than you, and less qualified than you. You can call it the "Bush Syndrome" if you like, but the fact of the matter is that you cannot simply live your life free of the influence of the "ignorant." In this regard, it matters very much what the public thinks, and it matters to everyone that Berkeley isn't seen in the same light as HYPSMC.</p>
<p>Gutrade,</p>
<p>If your boss is a professor who leads a department, it matters more what he thinks than what US News thinks. You need to consider that.</p>
<p>"Dummer" than you? </p>
<p>And what the ****? Not many Berkeley students are getting into UCSF? A HUGE number of Berkeley students got into UCSF this year.</p>
<p>That's enough of these ridiculous bickerings. I think I'm actually dumber from reading a few of these posts. Dummer, I should say.</p>
<p>Dummer is the German way of saying it. It's the only cool way.</p>
<p>Gertrude,</p>
<p>If you're talking about the ignorant public, caltech and mit mean nothing to them. What do they care about these intense, tech-oriented places? More have heard of Berkeley, and as to others, they have mysterious impressions. If you are talking about the public as in CEOs and large business owners, judges, doctors, lawyers, and other leadership positions, these people tend to not be ignorant, and aren't these the people that you want to impress?</p>
<p>CEOs, large business owners, judges, doctors, and lawyers are more impressed with HYPSMC than Berkeley. It's like a given, and I dont know why it comes as a surprise to you guys.</p>
<p>It depends on what youre talking about. If youre talking about engineering majors, EECS in particular, Berkeley is not looked as any lower than other schools. That is EQUAL to stanford caltech mit cornell, beyond that berkeley is better. Now please clarify also, as all of the persons listed above, more likely than not have graduate degrees, and in most respects, Berkeley is nothing to scoff at, and a graduate degree from Berkeley is pretty damn impressive. So if youre referring to these persons and how they view undergraduates, yes in a lot of majors HYPSMC is viewed at a higher level, but if we are talking about how they view graduates, then i dont believe there is a gap anymore.</p>
<p>I don't necessarily agree with this, but in general, would you say that Berkeley is worse to the "superior" undergrads about the same as Berkeley is superior to the inferior grad programs at other schools?</p>
<p>No i dont think its such a teeter-totter of sorts, if one goes up the other goes down. I think its just that overall Cal does not have as good an undergraduate education in many majors as compared to other schools. But as far as graduate schools go, i think it is pretty much on par with other powerhouses. Cal has its strong points and its weak points, and i think that overall the average is the same as with other schools.</p>
<p>But Cal has the overall best combination of grad programs. None of this equal with the powerhouse nonsense.</p>
<p>Berkeley doesn't have a med school, and it is considerably weaker than Harvard and Stanford in terms of professional schools. The only two schools that have the best overall combination of all graduate programs are Harvard and Stanford. They have everything from top PhD programs to the top professional schools.</p>
<p>How is Boalt not a top law school? How is Haas not a top B-School? What the hell is your definition of "top?" Top 3? Number 1?</p>
<p>You have ZERO perspective of reality.</p>
<p>Who gave you authority to generalize the perception of the general public. BTW, Penn has a better med school and a b-school that is on par with, if not better than, Stanford's.</p>
<p>I would agree that Stanford's UG is better than Cal's. However, I would argue that Cal's graduate programs are top notch.</p>
<p>Yes, UCB does not have a medical school. That's why there is UCSF.</p>