<p>newyorka, I think what makes an even better instituition than one who can use it’s billions how ever it pleases is one that deals with lack of federal funding and makes due to remain one of the world’s top universities.</p>
<p>I wonder how great so many of these private schools would remain working on the budget Cal is.</p>
<p>Wow, defensiveness knows no bounds on this board!</p>
<p>Calrule, any college that loses the necessary funds to hire and retain top profs will become less good. There is no upside to an institution from being poor. It does not build institutional character.</p>
<p>So to the OP, back to your question, if you can afford a school that is not hamstrung by money it is a gift.</p>
<p>Those are 37 retention cases; it does not mention how many actually left.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Have you not read any of my previous posts? What Berkeley loses in funds to “hire and retain top profs” is gained through the Hewlett donation, the matching money, the campaign, and more.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Clearly, you don’t know how “devestating” the budget cuts are. Again, you have not truly backed up your claims, but rather posted an article from a grad student at Berkeley in the English department. Still, the full impact of the budget cuts isn’t known, and given the statistics and sources of alternative funding I posted, I daresay there’s a strong case for the opposite.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I turned down HYP before I turned down Berkeley–had I not gotten into Stanford, I’d be going to Cal now (the ‘budget cuts’ were not a deterrent). ;)</p>
<p>Not really…but you didn’t answer my question. Dealing with a certain number of retention cases does not mean those professors chose to leave. Cal hasn’t lost the funds to hire the top professors because they’re already there. As far as keeping them, none I can name (but I’d appreciate you doing so) have left and the quality of education doesn’t seem to be suffering and I don’t believe it will. </p>
<p>I didn’t mean that comment to come off as you perceived it, but simply that a school has to be pretty damn good to do what UC Berkeley has accomplished with what it’s been working with. Any place that can do that is a place where you should want to learn. And Berkeley is rich in so many more ways.</p>
<p>Also, back to the original question: I think you should go with the best fit for you. An expensive school doesn’t mean it’s better and budget cuts don’t make a school bad. My school suffered severe cuts 2 years back and it still managed to provide an excellent education and experience to 2,000+ students, as well as sending a good chunk of kids to great schools and better things all over the country. But by all means, go to a place where you believe you fit in and will do the best. I just don’t think you should say no to something before trying for it.</p>
<p>Dude,
Put the 100% of the 100K into a high grwth mutual fund and retire rich before you’re 50. No kidding. No college in the world, not Harvard, Oxford, None can offer that kind of career security.</p>
<p>Not getting the R&C requirement doesn’t concern me (should have it done before entering Cal anyway), but budget cuts would still cut into other areas as well, right..? My Cal Class of '11 EECS friend hasn’t had any trouble getting classes thus far, either.</p>
<p>Should I even bother applying to private colleges (that I would definitely have to pay full price for)?</p>
<p>“Should I even bother applying to private colleges (that I would definitely have to pay full price for)?”</p>
<p>I have watched my daughter, who is pretty definitive when it comes to decisions, change gears a bunch of times since her junior year. And now that she’s graduated, I suspect that she would switch from “needs to be close to home” to “I’d like to try the west coast.”<br>
In other words, leave your options open and make the decisions as late as possible in the game (unless you decide to apply ED to Berkeley).</p>
<p>In theory, it would, and it may, but I don’t think it will in very noticeable ways, or ways that would reasonably deter applicants.</p>
<p>Berkeley has had to deal with this sort of thing before, and it has weathered through it, maintaining the same level of excellence and beyond. Check out its history–it’s very interesting.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Ha, right–the Axe will remain at home, where it belongs.</p>
Disagree. The axe will be at Berkeley for the next 5 years-- at least! Stanfurd should enjoy it for the next couple of months because it’s coming back soon.</p>
<p>I think you have aticles and links for just about every thing. But that blue and gold looks beautiful, doesn’t it?</p>
<p>I’m not gonna lie though, we lost to USC last year because the Native American spirits beneath Memorial Stadium were upset about the whole tree thng.</p>
<p>I don’t know about other people, but none of my family members had any problem graduating within 4 years.<br>
In fact, for Engineering, they only allow a maximum of 9 semesters.<br>
And Cal set up class registration in a hierarchial model: the more senior you become, the less likely you’re kept out of a class due to overenrollment. So unless someone is really really unlucky, he might not get into a class no more than ONCE.
The stats for Engineering are quite impressive so your peers are likely to be as good if not better than you.<br>
The OP is asking for Engineering, so English department, foreign language department budget cut should not affect anything.</p>