<p>Dude...I think very few people would care that it has "all five graduate schools." I'm pretty sure that's the last thing on someone's mind when deciding where to go to college.</p>
<p>Nevertheless, at least you have pride in your school...</p>
<p>"If you do not want to be accountable for CE Man's post, then don't state the same conclusions that he/she did while giving thanks to his/her resources."</p>
<p>I used CE Mans post to prove another post was factually incorrect. (and correctly attributed my use of his post to him)</p>
<p>You are taking my use of his post out of context, your bad.</p>
<p>"You are taking my use of his post out of context, your bad."</p>
<p>Right, my bad. Yet, you're still referring to that ranking mistake which no longer exists as seen here in this post:
<a href="http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/showthread.php?p=3780098#post3780098%5B/url%5D">http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/showthread.php?p=3780098#post3780098</a></p>
<p>And since the mistake no longer exists, explain how this is not false information.</p>
<p>And don't divert the other questions. You've clearly distributed false information.</p>
<p>I am not distributing any false information so don't impugne my character. You refuse to acknowledge that damage was done to UCD's reputation by the ranking drop. Damage was done and takes time to correct.</p>
<p>You also fail to account for the fact that in one years time other schools could have improved a great deal thereby thwarting UCD's ability to regain its previous rank in spite of the 2006 error being corrected.</p>
<p>"I am not distributing any false information so don't impugne my character."</p>
<p>Then what's your explanation for your claim that UCD has ALL 5 graduate schools? That's false and you're distributing false information while claiming that it is true.</p>
<p>"You refuse to acknowledge that damage was done to UCD's reputation by the ranking drop. Damage was done and takes time to correct."</p>
<p>That damage in reputation affects the rankings a lot less as it is a subjective category. The objective category, faculty ranking has been corrected, therefore it should have gone up substantially.</p>
<p>"You also fail to account for the fact that in one years time other schools could have improved a great deal thereby thwarting UCD's ability to regain its previous rank in spite of the 2006 error being corrected."</p>
<p>Here, I'll account for it. Which means, in that time, UCD did not improve a great deal, thus rightfully earning its spot at the 47th spot. Hence, all that talk of UCD better than UCI based on ranking goes out the window. Thanks for further proving my point.</p>
<p>UC Davis Graduate Schools</p>
<p>1.Medical School and Health Science Study
2.Law School
3.Business School
4.Graduate School
5.Veterinary Medicine</p>
<p>"Here, I'll account it. Which means, in that time, UCD did not improve a great deal, thus rightfully earning its spot at the 47th spot. Hence, all that talk of UCD better than UCI based on ranking goes out the window. Thanks for further proving my point."</p>
<p>Except that I never said any of that so I did not in fact prove your point.</p>
<p>""The argument that UCD should be ranked higher in the U.S. News is completely incorrect."</p>
<p>Also I NEVER even made this assertion. I said that UCD had dropped in the rankings due to an error, and it will take time to correct the damage from that. That is a completely different assertion. Once again you are putting words into my mouth.</p>
<p>"UC Davis Graduate Schools</p>
<p>1.Medical School and Health Science Study
2.Law School
3.Business School
4.Graduate School
5.Veterinary Medicine"</p>
<p>Your point being? I don't see Graduate school of education, optometry, or any other graduate schools on there. So, therefore, your statement that UC Davis has all 5 graduate schools is wrong.</p>
<p>"Except that I never said any of that so I did not in fact prove your point."</p>
<p>This is what logically follows from your assertion.
"Also I NEVER even made this assertion. I said that UCD had dropped in the rankings due to an error, and it will take time to correct the damage from that. That is a completely different assertion. Once again you are putting words into my mouth."</p>
<p>I never said you said it. When did I ever say that? This was posted in another thread and I've already answered you there. It was directed at CE Man. Here's an advice that you gave to another poster, "READING COMPREHENSION".</p>
<p>"That damage in reputation affects the rankings a lot less as it is a subjective category. The objective category, faculty ranking has been corrected, therefore it should have gone up substantially."</p>
<p>You are interjecting your own opinion here. (that damage is subjective and affects ranking a lot less) You are not accounting for other variables and dismissing damage caused by the 2006 error. </p>
<p>objective category: Damage was severe therefore it will take two to three years for rankings and reputation to recover.</p>
<p>You most certainly did say that I said that. You then went on to argue that I was distributing false information and attributed CE Mans whole assertion to me.</p>
<p>"You are interjecting your own opinion here. (that damage is subjective and affects ranking a lot less) You are not accounting for other variables and dismissing damage caused by the 2006 error."</p>
<p>Such as what? What other categories were actually impacted, tell me, I would like to know.</p>
<p>"objective category: Damage was severe therefore it will take two to three years for rankings and reputation to recover."</p>
<p>Wrong. Objective category takes the changing of a number to alter. It will not take two or three years.</p>
<p>"You most certainly did say that I said that."</p>
<p>Post it. Prove it.</p>
<p>Here's the sequence:
CE Man (OP): UCD should be ranked higher.
.
.
.
Voiceofreason (You): megathunder we all know what we've got here and how awesome it is. That's all that matters dude. Go Ags!
.
.
.
TheRighteous (I): The argument that UCD should be ranked higher in the U.S. News is completely incorrect.
Voiceofreason (You) starts posting.</p>
<p>Now, you didn't say anything of importance before I made that statement yet you think I directed that statement at you? I'm sorry, I don't have ESP.</p>
<p>'I've already disproved that ridiculous claim that it takes time for a school to regain its ranking here:
<a href="http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/...d.php?t=314039%5B/url%5D">http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/...d.php?t=314039</a></p>
<p>Take note of how UCD students defend their school without ever questioning the validity of the OP's claim.</p>
<p>I think a healthy dose of school spirit is great, but aggressive false advertising of schools to prospective students is wrong. This forum is supposed to provide useful information for graduating seniors so they can choose where they want to go for the next four years. This is obviously difficult to do with false and biased information."</p>
<p>"Since you are using the same argument that the misreporting of data caused UCD to slip below UCI in 2006 as CE Man stated below:"</p>
<p>In every instance of this discussion you have been impugning me based on what someone else said. Yes CE Man said that I did not.</p>
<p>I said that UCD had dropped in the rankings due to an error, and it will take time to correct the damage from that. That is a completely different assertion.</p>
<p>"I said that UCD had dropped in the rankings due to an error, and it will take time to correct the damage from that. That is a completely different assertion."</p>
<p>That assertion you made was the same one made by megathunder except for he/she actually thought through it before posting it. And I disproved it. Read. Besides, I was referring to megathunder's post which is the only relevant post since it is the same assertion that you made with more details.</p>
<p>That statement was not directed at you. If you use the same logic that I'm referring to that thread in respond to your post, shouldn't you conclude that every single post in that thread is directed at you?</p>
<p>Hi. I am the creator of this thread and let me tell you, I had no idea this thread would explode with all these posts since it was started. I appreciate all the posts. I'd like to have some things clarified/confirmed/acknowledged before this thread gets more out of control than it already is:</p>
<p>-I don't care about graduate school (forgive the frankness)
-From what I understand, in the greater scheme of things, Irvine and Davis do not differ that much in terms of GENERAL academic performance. I don't care whether one school is SLIGHTLY better than the other.
-Voiceofreason claims in post #6 that UCD has however a clearly superior engineering program--which certainly entices me. Any other views on this?
-Assuming academics are virtually equal in both schools, which would you say then has a stronger social scene? Factor in nicer people, competitiveness, how many people actually stay during weekends, parties, things to do at night.
-I likely will not join a frat
-I don't care much for football</p>
<p>Thanks!</p>
<p>Nagare: from what I hear, both of the schools will provide different experiences. UCI is (obviously) in socal, closer to the beach, and closer to LA and even Mexico. A lot of UCI students seem to hang out a lot in surrounding areas rather than the campus itself... (correct me if I'm wrong)
UCD is a very "collegey" school. The campus is BEAUTIFUL (as is Irvine's). There isn't much to do in the town of Davis, but I know people who love going to the school and have very fulfilling social lives. People seem to be very personable and down to earth at Davis, again contributing to the 'colleginess.'
Anyway, I think that both schools offer great attributes and I can see why you are struggling to choose between the two. Consider things like quality of housing, and LOCATION (since both are sooo different) when comparing the campus life. :)
btw...I'm choosing UCI over UCD mainly because of proximity to the beach :D Also I've grown up in Nor Cal and am ready for a change.</p>
<p>Wow get off of each other's backs. I, like Nagare am really interested in hearing different people's opinions regarding the atmosphere of the school, what there is to do nearby, etc. I don't think any of us care in a miniscule difference in accepted students' SAT scores.</p>
<p>A photograph is worth a thousand words:</p>
<p>These are photographs of UC Davis. Use the links on the left to see even more.</p>
<p>which campus is better between the two?</p>
<p>The Brian you need to visit and decide for yourself. It depends on what you want out of your college life.</p>