<p>I have been hearing that Stanford and UC Berkeley is incomparable in academics. Is that true? They say UC Berkeley is nothing campared to Stanford . . . People say Stanford is better compared with Harvard.</p>
<p>worriemom... Stanford is certainly more prestigious overall. Stanford may be better in technological fieldds compared to harvard. but ttrying to squeeze out a comparison between stanford and harvard is splitting hairs. They both top notch, but they have their differences. I think Harvard may be a little tougher to get into though</p>
<p>berkeley is by no means BAD. it's very highly regarded and has incredible academics. in some cases, berkeley is probably to go to than stanford.</p>
<p>and i agree with johnc613 about stanford vs harvard. when people bring up the "ranks" i want to roll my eyes. i see no huge difference between the schools at ALL. harvard just has like 1-2 percent lower acceptance. other than that, each school as its own respective pros and cons.</p>
<p>Why would you say something like that?</p>
<p>I do believe Stanford is an incredible place, it's my dream school, but they're both great, you know! I wouldn't put down all the students who go to Berkeley just like that.</p>
<p>oh god - here we go again.</p>
<p>Agreed, this argument is needless.</p>
<p>Nah. A rivalry between two schools doesn't exist because the schools are close in proximity; if that were the case, Berkeley and UC Davis would be rivals. No, rivalry usually exists because there's a clear competition, not just in athletics, but in academics (though some schools have rivalries just about athletics). UCLA vs. USC -- Yale vs. Harvard -- Berkeley vs. Stanford. They're all very comparable.</p>
<p>Check out the NRC rankings (which, while a little dated, are still relevant):</p>
<p>NRC</a> Rankings</p>
<p>For overall academic disciplines, see:</p>
<p>Arts/humanities
1. Berkeley
...
7. Stanford</p>
<p>Biological sciences
1. Stanford
...
5. Berkeley</p>
<p>Engineering
2. Berkeley
3. Stanford</p>
<p>Physical sciences/math
1. Berkeley
...
8. Stanford</p>
<p>Social/behavioral
1. Berkeley
2. Stanford</p>
<p>35 of Berkeley's 36 programs were rated in the top 10; Stanford has, I think, 40 and the overwhelming majority are rated in the top 10 (though Berkeley still has the title for the most top 10 departments and #1 departments, I think). In more recent rankings, all of Berkeley's are ranked in the top 10; Stanford's is similar, if not the same.</p>
<p>There are other rankings, too, that show that Harvard and Stanford are on par in their programs, along with Berkeley. For example, these world rankings:</p>
<p>Arts/humanities
1. Harvard
2. Berkeley
...
11. Stanford</p>
<p>Life Sciences & Biomedicine
1. Harvard
...
5. Berkeley
6. Stanford</p>
<p>Natural Sciences
1. Berkeley
...
4. Harvard
...
7. Stanford</p>
<p>Social Sciences
1. Harvard
2. Berkeley
...
5. Stanford</p>
<p>Technology
2. Berkeley
3. Stanford
...
15. Harvard</p>
<p>Anyone who tells you that Berkeley and Stanford are incomparable in academics, or that Stanford is better than Harvard, has no idea what he/she is talking about.</p>
<p>Are those rankings for undergraduate education, grad school, or research? I can believe that Berkley meets or beats Stanford for research or graduate studies in certain fields. I have a really hard time believing that Berkley can even come close for undergraduate education. This is mainly because, from what I've heard (and I'm still in high school, so my knowledge is kind of limited) top public schools like Berk=huge lecture halls with 200+ students, cutthroat competition, and teachers who are more interested in research than teaching, while top private schools like Stanford= small classes, more cooperation and less competition between students, and professors who as a rule care about teaching as much as they do about research. I've yet to apply to college, but when I do, I'll be hoping for Stanford.</p>
<p>
[quote]
I have a really hard time believing that Berkley can even come close for undergraduate education.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>It's not for undergrad. The NRC ranking is for grad programs. The other, just the programs.</p>
<p>
[quote]
top public schools like Berk=huge lecture halls with 200+ students
[/quote]
</p>
<p>And that's the stereotype. Believe it or not, it's the same way at Stanford. ~4-5% of Stanford's courses have more than 100 students. It's ~5-6% at Berkeley.</p>
<p><a href="http://cds.berkeley.edu/pdfs/PDF%20wBOOKMARKS%2006-07.pdf%5B/url%5D">http://cds.berkeley.edu/pdfs/PDF%20wBOOKMARKS%2006-07.pdf</a>
Stanford</a> University: Common Data Set 2006-2007</p>
<p>
[quote]
cutthroat competition
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Depends on which majors you're in. The competition is largely overblown (again, the stereotype of a public school); there's much more cooperation.</p>
<p>
[quote]
teachers who are more interested in research than teaching
[/quote]
</p>
<p>You're going to get teachers who are much more interested in research and teachers who actually teach undergrads with interest. This will happen at any major research university -- or any 'real' research university at all.</p>
<p>Berkeley certainly has less money compared to Stanford, but it is still probably the best public college out there. A lot of my current professors/instructors went to Berkeley.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Berkeley certainly has less money compared to Stanford
[/quote]
</p>
<p>It does, as Stanford is lavishly funded, but I'll add something else: while Berkeley's endowment is substantially smaller than Stanford's, Berkeley gets government funding -- about $400-500 million each year. Since a university typically spends ~5% of its endowment each year (I think Stanford spends about 4%), a university would need $8-10 billion in its endowment to match what Berkeley gets in government revenue. On top of that, Stanford has a med school, which is very costly; UCSF has always been Berkeley's med school, so their endowments together would be about $5b. Then you'd have to factor in the "implied" endowment of UCSF, which receives $500-600 million each year from the government. Of course, these two have more students to support, but the idea is there.</p>
<p>Whoever says Berkeley is bad is either joking or seriously mistaken. But for undergrads, few would dispute that Stanford is much more similar to HYPM than to Berkeley.</p>
<p>Ph.D Institution: UC Berkeley Stanford MIT Harvard Princeton
Biological Sciences 2 1 2 2 9
Chemistry 1 5 2 2 14
Computer Science 1 1 1 20 9
Economics 3 3 1 3 3
Education 4 1 2<br>
Engineering 3 2 1 20 11
English 1 4 1 4
History 2 4 4 2
Geology 3 3 2 7 11
Mathematics 2 2 1 2 2
Applied Math 5 4 1 21 5
Physics 3 3 1 3 3
Political Science 5 2 10 1 4
Psychology 2 1 11 5 5
Sociology 2 6 8 6
Percent of programs in top 5 100% 93% 82% 67% 57% </p>
<p>So H/S/B have the best graduate schools in US.</p>
<p>In US News ph.d programs ranking, Berkeley and Stanford are virtually tied up, with both having a tiny edge over Harvard. But Harvard's greatest strength is in its professional schools, with Stanford being the only school that can challenge Harvard. See below.</p>
<p>MBA: #1 Harvard, #2 Stanford, #8 Berkeley
Medical school: #1 Harvard, #7 Stanford, (Berkeley not ranked)
Law school: #2 Harvard, #2 Stanford, #8 Berkeley
school of education: #3 Harvard, #2 Stanford, #8 Berkeley</p>
<p>
[quote]
Medical school: #1 Harvard, #7 Stanford, (Berkeley not ranked)
[/quote]
</p>
<p>berkeley is not ranked because it does not have a medical school. it's medical school is UCSF, one of the top schools in the country (#5)</p>
<p>Why are you all using graduate school ratings to determine whether a college has a good undergraduate education? I hate to break the news but often times great grad school universities have less than exceptional undergrads or vice versa. Seems like ridiculous criteria considering that many great grad school universities have less than ideal undergrads and some schools don't really have grad school emphasis at all (e.g. Princeton).</p>
<p>You are nitty picking small nuances b/w schools rather than perceiving that they are all great schools for both undergraduate and graduate (except Harvard, where undergrads are clearly second class citizens).</p>
<p>
[quote]
Why are you all using graduate school ratings to determine whether a college has a good undergraduate education?
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Where did the OP say anything about undergrad education? He/she simply said "academics." The only grad school rankings given were NRC and US News. The THES one is just 'programs.'</p>
<p>
[quote]
I hate to break the news but often times great grad school universities have less than exceptional undergrads or vice versa.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Overall, yes. But for specific programs? Grad school is less divorced from undergrad than people think, for individual programs. Why? Because much of it is going to be the same -- the same top faculty, the same libraries, the same research projects, many of the same courses. Your discussion sections will likely be taught by grads in those top grad programs.</p>
<p>
[quote]
except Harvard, where undergrads are clearly second class citizens
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Really, I think it's roughly the same at Stanford. The grad:undergrad ratios at Harvard and Stanford are the same -- 2:1. Clearly, grad is stronger for them -- they are leaders in grad education (along with Berkeley, MIT, and a few others). Many complain that undergrads are considered 'second-class citizens.' Yes, many of the superficial measures say otherwise -- like the student:faculty ratio (which is often manipulated and misleading), etc. But at any major research university, public or private, you won't know your professor for a portion of your classes (I think Stanford's students on average take ~25% of their courses with more than 100 students; it's something like 33% at Berkeley). The same happens at Berkeley. You can get involved if you try -- going to office hours, getting into discussions, getting involved in research, etc.</p>
<p>why would an undergrad wants to take small classes at Stanford. The grade curve in small classes(say 20 people classes) is pretty brutal unless the undergrad is in the top 2-3 people in class, and considering the typical Stanford students, chances are the undergrad's classmates are going to be smarter than s/he is.</p>
<p>
[quote]
why would an undergrad wants to take small classes at Stanford.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Er, isn't that the advantage that people say on CC is what makes Stanford > Berkeley/most schools? (I personally think the 'small classes' point is overblown.)</p>
<p>I think this guy is supporting Berkeley, kyledavid.</p>