The Top California Colleges

College Search & Selection
121

<p>and this is occidental</p>

<p>Applications to Occidental Top 5,000 </p>

<hr>

<p><a href="http://www.oxy.edu/x2801.xml%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.oxy.edu/x2801.xml&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

<p>Occidental College has received a record-breaking number of applications for the seventh consecutive year, topping the 5,000 mark for the first time in the school’s 118-year history.</p>

<p>Preliminary results show that at least 5,050 students submitted applications seeking admission to the Class of 2009, an increase of 4 percent as compared to last year. Overall, applications to Occidental have risen a remarkable 170 percent over the past eight years (as compared to 1,865 applications in 1997).</p>

<p>According to U.S. News & World Report, only 13 top ranked liberal arts colleges received 5,000 or more applications in 2003-04, the most recent year for which such numbers are available.</p>

<p>“I’m often asked why we have seen such a dramatic rise in applications,” said Bill Tingley, vice president for admission and financial aid. “It’s not the result of any dramatic changes here. Rather, it reflects the growing recognition of Occidental’s long tradition of excellence, its superb faculty, demanding curriculum, diverse and talented students, and its location in one of the world’s great cities.”</p>

<p>The applicant pool has increased not only in size but in quality, added Dean of Admission Vince Cuseo. “We expect this year's admit rate to be the lowest ever -- which means some very tough choices for our Admission staff," he said.</p>

<p>Newsweek has named Occidental one of the country’s hottest colleges twice during the past four years. Occidental plans to enroll approximately 430 students in its fall 2005 first-year class.</p>

122

<p>to KFC</p>

<p>If Pomona had an undergraduate size the same as Berkeley then Pomona would hypothetically (if it maintained its vigorous admission standards/professors/curriculum/etc) send over 1100 students to those "top graduate schools."</p>

<p>Nevertheless, I'm not saying that Berkeley is whimpy, unchallenging, etc. I'm just pointing out that Pomona has a higher success rate at getting students into top grad schools then Berkeley does, which shows that Pomona is an excellent school that should not be pushed aside. </p>

<p>Someone posted a ranking a few posts back and did not even list Pomona to be one of the top schools along with Stanford, Berkeley, and Cal tech. Interestingly enough UCSD was placed above Pomona too.</p>

<p>Before I go...let me re-emphasize that I think Berkeley is one of the best schools in the state, nation, and world. Some of my friends that go there are some of the smartest people I know. However, I think that Pomona easily ranks alongside or even slightly above Berkeley.</p>

123

<p>i see your point azncoolkiemonstr, and i do think pomona is highly under-regarded because its name isnt out there, but i also believe sometimes people underrate berkeley too. </p>

<p>"perhaps, because Berkeley has an undergraduate business program, they recruit right out of the undergrad program, you don't need a masters??"</p>

<p>although for a MBA, you usually need 2 years worth of work experience before B-schools will take you. so the berkeley undergrad business program (or any other undergrad biz program) doesnt really have much to do with recruiting at B-schools.</p>

124

<p>azncoolkiemonstr:
"If Pomona had an undergraduate size the same as Berkeley then Pomona would hypothetically (if it maintained its vigorous admission standards/professors/curriculum/etc) send over 1100 students to those "top graduate schools.""</p>

<p>i know what you're trying to say, but i also think we should look at the numbers itself rather than percentage. pomona wouldnt really be pomona if it were the size of berkeley. also, if we did the reverse and hypothetically shrunk berkeley down, then hypothetically, it could only accept the top students (the percentage wouldn't be proportional), and then berkeley's percentage of sending students to top grad/professional programs will GO UP A LOT. berkeley's top 118 students out of the size of pomona college would make a feeder score of 32%, clearly crushing the rest of the list. so yea, hypothetical situations are hard to work out cuz the school wouldnt be itself anymore if it changed. </p>

<p>anyway, both pomona and berkeley are fine institutions =D</p>

125

<p>yup. I agree =)</p>

126

<p>First, I think that the administration at USC has set a goal for the univeristy of excellence and that they have the resources to do it. They are a shrewed, accomplished, and determined bunch who milked the "spolied children" who attended and are now socal professionals and greatly enricheed their coffers; now their will do what Stanford did and what WUStL is doing...buy their way into eliteness. One way of doing that immediately is to buy the students who would otherwise go to Stanford, Berkeley, UCLA, or any of the "second-tier" elites (that is, non-HYPSMC elites). I can't fault them for doing what's in the university's best interests, and really, I can't say anything but good things about the administration (with the exception of all the Trojan family crap). </p>

<p>Second, and OTOH, I am wholly unimpressed by the student body, with the exception of the Presidential and Trustees scholars. The dumb, rich kids from the Westside and particularly from Orange County are nauseating to be around, but if you constantly remind yourself that your education is being funded by their parents largesse, you'll be able to stomach them. </p>

<p>The "University of Spoiled Children" reputation was one that I just thought poorer UCLA students (I'm differentiating them from the richer UCLA students, of which there are many) used to insult the school. However, this couldn't be more deserved. So many students are wealthy, take it for granted, and demand implicitly that you keep up with the Joneses or get left behind. </p>

<p>The frat scene is stifling in that it creates a very distinct fissure between two large components of the campus, that is, the frat and sorority members and the rest of the undergrads. Moreover, USC is, well, a football school, and not much else. The students, for the most part, are not terribly bright, and there is no academic substance under all of that sports style. </p>

<p>That said, if you want to go to Thorton School of Music, the School of Architecture, the Film School, or the Annenberg School of Communications, I think you'd be very satisfied. I find that the kids in these schools are a cut above those in the Marshall School of Business, the College, or the Viterbi School of Engineering. Moreover, these professional programs are quite respected, particularly in SoCal, and for the Music and Film schools, across the nation.</p>

<p>My $.02</p>

127

<p>"Stanford, Berkeley, UCLA, or any of the "second-tier" elites (that is, non-HYPSMC elites)"</p>

<p>how is Stanford a second tier non-HYPSMC elite? that doesnt even make sense.</p>

128

<p>Stanford, Berkeley, and UCLA are not in the subset of "second-tier" non-HYPSMC elites. I'm say A, B, C, or D, and describing D as a groups of schools excluding A.</p>

129

<p>
[quote]
That said, if you want to go to Thorton School of Music, the School of Architecture, the Film School, or the Annenberg School of Communications, I think you'd be very satisfied. I find that the kids in these schools are a cut above those in the Marshall School of Business, the College, or the Viterbi School of Engineering. Moreover, these professional programs are quite respected, particularly in SoCal, and for the Music and Film schools, across the nation.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>They are a cut above because they are smaller schools. Any large major is going to have greater diversity in terms of intelligence across the board. You take the top 30% of Marshall, the College, and Viterbi and they are among the brightest kids at USC; actually probably THE brightest at USC.</p>

<p>Also Annenburg, the communication side is far from impressive, although I do respect the journalism side for the intensity. But even the journalism side takes a backseat to lets say Leventhal at Marshall.</p>

130

<p>stanford is by far the best school in california, and one of the best in the nation. maybe not reputation wise, as most ivy leagues are easier to buy your way into, but i would say it's up there.</p>

131

<p>poufifiedbumbum,</p>

<p>Yes and no.
Caltech has the same caliber as Stanford in the West. Stanford is the best all-rounded school in the nations. Reputation wise, Stanford only loses to Harvard. Most Ivies are not even close to Stanford.</p>

132

<p>05<em>01</em>04:</p>

<p>Good post, and I completely echo your views on the administration. In regards to the spoiled OC/westside children everywhere though, I've found that USC students usually self-segregate themselves via the row. Though I know many down to earth, intellectually impressive people who are greeks, I would venture that the vast majority of the "spoiled (rich) children" whose image hurts that of USC's live on the row. Essentially, if one wanted to limit their exposure to this aspect of USC's student body (though I'm not nevcessarily advocating that they should), they could.</p>

133

<p>The kids I know at Harvey Mudd are brilliant.</p>

134

<p>Harvey Mudd has some brilliant kids.</p>

135

<p>when i toured HMC i felt the kids were kinda arrogant. the kids giving the tour thought the median SAT math score for the school was 800. it also seemed like they had a one sided rivalry with caltech.</p>

136

<p>harvey mudd's average sat math score is 750, while caltech's average sat math score is 774. so they're fairly close. in terms of athletics, i think harvey mudd (and whichever other claremont school they combine with to form the team) does do better than caltech, if im correct, so there's a one-sided rivalry. but as far as academic rivalry, i think its like saying stanford vs. pomona.</p>

137

<p>As universities, I would rate them as follows:</p>

<p>Research universities</p>

<h1>1 Stanford University</h1>

<h1>2 California Institute of Technology and University of California-Berkeley</h1>

<h1>4 University of California-Los Angeles</h1>

<h1>5 University of Southern California</h1>

<h1>6 University of California-San Diego</h1>

<h1>6 University of California-Davis, University of California-Santa Barbara</h1>

<h1>8 University of California-Irvine</h1>

<h1>9 University of California-Santa Cruz</h1>

<p>LACs:</p>

<h1>1 Pomona College</h1>

<h1>2 Claremont McKenna College</h1>

<h1>3 Harvey Mudd College</h1>

<h1>4 Scripps College</h1>

<h1>5 Occidental College</h1>

<p>Honorable mention:
CalPoli-SLO
Pitzer College
Santa Clara University</p>

138

<p>Most california schools are overrated.</p>

139

<p>why do you say so davidav87? i actually think due to east coast bias, most california schools are underrated... or at least close to accurately rated.</p>