<p>Also I would like to add:</p>
<p>It’s like comparing a doctor vs a lawyer
A mechanical engineer vs electrical engineer
So on, so forth. So, which one is better? The answer would be neither. By comparing a UC (Research University) with CSU (Hands-on University) is exactly what that is like. What I’m trying to say here is that one is NOT better than the other, they are different. </p>
<p>And that is also why I take ranking with a grain of salt. Yes, the average GPA and SAT scores for admissions is important for the overall statistics of the school, but anyone can sit in front of a book and memorize the answers and earn a high grade–but no one can feign passion. Passion is what makes people stand out during job interviews (or their overall pursuit of success) out of all the other applicants who also have high GPA. Passion is what created Google; Steve Jobs for Apple, Mark for Facebook, Gates for Microsoft, and ad infinitum. Also, because ranks tend to be subjective, opinionated, biased, and widely varied by each individual company that ranks college; it causes negative consequences to the school and students.</p>
<p>I believe that ranking can stereotype schools to a certain extent and cause a negative consequences to those who went to a ‘lower’ ranked school by judging them base on their school rather than their capability. A student who went to Cal State LA will be looked ‘down’ upon when they shouldn’t be just because of the school they went to, but rather on their character, ambition, and drive. Everyone is different. Steven Spielberg went to Cal State Long Beach, Tom Hanks went to Sacramento State University, and etc.</p>
<p>That’s why, instead of solely focusing on the reputation of the school–regardless if you went to Cal Poly SLO, UC Berkeley, CSUF, Cal State LA, and etc–people should focus on the character of the person. Their drive, passion, and character–rather than ‘the school’.</p>