Undergrad. Major Rankings Questions

<p>I think the anti-California stuff stems from a few very zealous Cal students who try to argue Cal is better than Stanford. Its crazy how much Cal comes up on this forum, but I bet if the fanatics quieted down people wouldn't be so anti Cal. They make you guys look bad.</p>

<p>Has a Brown, Dartmouth, Penn, Columbia, or Duke student EVER argued that they are better than Stanford? </p>

<p>Funny, I really wanted to live in California after school, but there's such a northeastern pull at the Ivies is ridiculous.</p>

<p>I think a good deal of Californians do understand the experience because many have the experience. If you look at where many of the kids at top Northeast colleges/Ivies come from, a good chunk is from the populous state of California!</p>

<p>Anyway, how would the experience at one of the Ivy/top Northeast schools differ from places in the West such as Stanford, the Claremont colleges, Reed, or Rice? I imagine they are comporable comparisons which aren't spot on but are fairly close.</p>

<p>How are all the world's problems due to the five or so zealous Cal people? I think it's more from the pro-California people (who are sometimes pro-Cal people). Many Californians often are pretty happy with California in general, and I could see that as annoying if they're really vocal about it. I think that Bostonians are sometimes annoying in that regard. Anyway, could we get rid of the zealous Cal fanatics and cure the world's diseases, poverty and strife already? :)</p>

<p>slipper,</p>

<p>The Cal-fanatics are, well...special. </p>

<p>As far as regional pull goes, I think it's interesting how my program keeps saying to everyone, "LEAVE! SHOO!" but everyone I know at other IR programs says their programs try to keep them close.</p>

<p>Must be trying to save SD for the SD natives.</p>

<p>Well, my Wharton MBA degree has served me very well in my professional dealings in both San Francisco and LA (btw, Wharton has a SF campus, Wharton West, which includes tailored Exec MBA programs for professionals based in the Bay Area):
<a href="http://www.wharton.upenn.edu/campus/wharton_west/%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.wharton.upenn.edu/campus/wharton_west/&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

<p>frankly, I think my Princeton undergrad + Wharton degree goes head to head with any possible Californian combination of undergrad + grad (including Stanford) - and I live and work in California btw...</p>

<p>the difference maker? in a word: flexibility.</p>

<p>if I ever decide to go back East, I'm not going to take any kind of reputational hit - and my degrees have also served me very well overseas as well (in Europe and in Asia).</p>

<p>the_prestige,</p>

<p>With the exception of the MBA, I'd put Cal's and Stanford's programs up against anything the East Coast can dish out.</p>

<p>Similarly, UCSF can take on any East Coast med programs for residencies.</p>

<p>MBAs are, however, one arena where the East Coast is still very strong. But don't discount little ol' Stanford.</p>

<p>UCLAri,</p>

<p>In California, Stanford is just as good as Princeton / Harvard / Yale, I agree - but I wouldn't say Stanford is BETTER. </p>

<p>As for Cal, I'm sorry, but I just don't think they are at HYPS level even in California - for instance, I get the occassional "wow, you went to Princeton" and this is FROM Cal grads.</p>

<p>Put another way, how many Cal grads back East would get "wow you went to Cal?" from a Princeton grad?</p>

<p>grads from the Ivies Stanford Duke MIT etc are probably set to work anywhere....after all, people from Cali from to the East Coast to get their degrees at elite non-Stanford schools and go home, not like they are at a disadvantage</p>

<p>
[quote]
As for Cal, I'm sorry, but I just don't think they are at HYPS level even in California - for instance, I get the occassional "wow, you went to Princeton" and this is FROM Cal grads.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>I would make the simply observation that we seem to clouded by the undergraduate program here. I am fairly confident that the Berkeley PhD programs can match any school's. Every Berkeley PhD student I've met have been of consistently high quality. Like I've always said, Berkeley is a stellar place to get your PhD. I know plenty of PhD students at MIT and Harvard who didn't get into Berkeley, and who have admitted that they would have gone there if they had gotten in. Furthermore, I think it's quite safe to say that a PhD from Berkeley can be a far more useful credential than a PhD from, say, Brown.</p>

<p>the_prestige,</p>

<p>I was talking about grad programs, particularly PhD programs. </p>

<p>Different ballgame, as sakky demonstrated.</p>

<p>
[quote]
Put another way, how many Cal grads back East would get "wow you went to Cal?" from a Princeton grad?

[/quote]
</p>

<p>My Princeton friend told me he once said it. </p>

<p>Of course, it was in reference to a guy who got his Phd in EECS from Cal.</p>

<p>I had an MIT grad say it to me for my grad program here at UCSD.</p>

<p>So nyah.</p>

<p>I agree that Cal's PhD dept's are top notch, and agree that in general Cal's grad programs are > than its undergrad.</p>

<p>I thought we were generally discussing undergrad quality however.</p>

<p>I think we went on a bit of a tangent.</p>

<p>Undergrad, however, you're right. No doubt.</p>

<p>Yeah, grad is different. The truth is the Ivies have a brand nationally, moreso than any other schools.</p>

<p>Y'know, I'd pit Stanford and CalTech against any of the Ivies and MIT.</p>

<p>Other than that...sadly I must admit that the Ivies are stronger for undergrad. Oh well.</p>

<p>
[quote]
The truth is the Ivies have a brand nationally, moreso than any other schools.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Moreso than any other schools? I don't know about that. I would say that Stanford and MIT, which are not Ivies, have brands that are, if nothing else, are at least more powerful than that of the 'lower Ivies'. Seriously, to assert that Stanford and MIT have less powerful brand names than, say, Cornell... come on now, that is not a mainstream opinion.</p>

<p>When I say Ivies I mean the Ivies + Stanford, Duke, Caltech, and MIT. </p>

<p>Alexandre has his opinions, I have mine. But I promise you prestige, Sakky, and myself are just as well versed and as successful in the business community.</p>

<p>
[quote]
When I say Ivies I mean the Ivies + Stanford, Duke, Caltech, and MIT.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Good to know. It clears up a lot.</p>

<p>
[quote]
Alexandre has his opinions, I have mine.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Okay?</p>

<p>
[quote]
But I promise you prestige, Sakky, and myself are just as well versed and as successful in the business community.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Am I missing a pitch here? Maybe I'm in the wrong inning? What play are we on?</p>

<p>Whossawassit? Why are you defending yourself?</p>

<p>UCLAri, I think Slipper was referring to my statement that I know more than he does about HR and strategic staffing. I think he thought I meant that I am more successful that he. Of course, that is not the case. I was pointing out that my job has been to make the most of super talent at the highest level. Even at places like Ford, Cisco and Goldman Sachs, I was considered quite competent at talent identification, acquisition and retention.</p>

<p>It doesn't make sense to call non-Ivies "Ivies." Ivy equivalents, sure, but Ivies just causes the misinformed to have their ideas further reinforced.</p>