<p>although mit and berkeley both have outstanding phd programs, berkeley has some programs that are ranked higher than mit. </p>
<p>why then is there such a big contrast in terms of educational excellence between berkeley's undergraduate programs and graduate programs? and would it be wise to go to berkeley undergrad in hopes of contacting phd professors?</p>
<p>Generally speaking, it's because MIT is smaller, and undergraduates get more attention from professors.</p>
<p>There's not a huge difference in program quality between MIT and Berkeley in most fields, even if one is ranked slightly higher than the other in some fields. The difference between the #1 PhD program in a discipline and the #2 PhD program is nonexistent, and nobody in his or her right mind would choose to go to MIT over Harvard in something like biology only because MIT is ranked a spot or two higher.</p>
<p>
[quote]
why then is there such a big contrast in terms of educational excellence between berkeley's undergraduate programs and graduate programs?
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I can think of several reasons right off the top of my head</p>
<ul>
<li>The sheer number of undergrads at Berkeley, that absolutely dwarfs the number of grad students. Contrast that with MIT where there are actually more grad students than there are undergrads. Hence, MIT undergrads simply have to fight less for access to academic resources, whereas Berkeley undergrads are constantly contending with other undergrads for resources. {Berkeley grad students, because of their comparatively lower numbers, also don't have to struggle for access to resources the way the undergrads do.}</li>
</ul>
<p>*Lower selectivity of Berkeley undergrads. Simply put, the average Berkeley undergrad is simply not as good as the average MIT undergrad, and in particular, Berkeley has a long tail end of undergrads who really aren't that good. In particular, many of the transfer students are of rather mediocre quality (although in fairness, some of the transfer students are pretty good). </p>
<p>The inability to freely choose majors at Berkeley. At MIT, you can major in any program you want and switch at anytime. At Berkeley, not so much. Many programs are impacted, meaning that the ability to switch into them is far from automatic. Heck, some programs are actually *reverse-impacted in the sense that they are hard to switch out of. The upshot is that you run the risk of majoring in something that you don't really want. </p>
<p>But I will say some things in Berkeley's defense. First off, I do think that the city of Berkeley is more interesting than is Cambridge (although both of them are clearly highly interesting college towns). The population at MIT is also (unsurprisingly) slanted towards technology and science, and sometimes you just want to kick back and talk about something artsy. The male/female ratio is also imbalanced which works out quite well for the women, but not so much for the men (note, while the undergrad ratio is quite even, the graduate ratio is clearly not).</p>
<p>I know Berkeley well, having a number of degrees from that school, including a doctorate. But as much as I love Berkeley, I fully supported my daughter's decision to choose MIT.</p>
<p>Hey, I'm an alum, so I'll start with Berkeley's positives. The campus community is electric. And I'll disagree with the above post, which characterized Berkeley students as less capable. Berkeley admits around 8,000 undergrads per year in contrast to MIT's roughly 1,000, and there are many, many extremely bright students at Cal, students who chose Berkeley over Ivy-League schools. Many of Cal's brightest students are there because their middle-class families could not afford to pay full freight at Stanford, MIT, Harvard, Yale, etc. Also, although the campus on average admits around 19% of applicants, it admits by departments, and some departments are far more selective. The EECS department admits only 6% of applicants, which makes it the most selective EECS department in the United States. Finally, the Berkeley campus is far more beautiful (in my opinion) than the MIT campus, with redwood trees, meandering streams, and Beaux Arts buildings nestled in the hills overlooking the San Francisco Bay.</p>
<p>Now for the negatives. First, every applicant has to declare a major. It is impossible to enter Berkeley undeclared and then decide you want to major in Engineering. And I don't believe that many 17 year olds -- the vast majority of whom have had absolutely no experience with engineering -- really know what they want to major in. In contrast, MIT allows students a year or more to explore and decide. The other negatives were fully fleshed out by the above poster, so they don't bear re-emphasizing here. But I do have a story that illustrates the advantages a student has at MIT.</p>
<p>My daughter's a freshman, and this January, after only a week or two of searching, she landed an undergraduate research position (UROP) with the machine vision project run by Dr. Thomas Serre and others at MIT. When she went in for her interview with Dr. Serre, the BBC was filming a story about his research. If you simply Google "Thomas Serre MIT" you'll find his website, which includes links to news articles about the project. It's fascinating. </p>
<p>MIT has one more huge advantage over Cal. At Berkeley, students compete for scarce research positions. They compete in foundation engineering courses, where the professors expect to cut a certain percentage of the class by the end of the semester. At MIT, students collaborate on projects, and they help each other. This was one of the most appealing features of MIT when my daughter first began to explore the Institute, and she tells me that it is a core part of MIT culture. She loves MIT and is really happy there. I'm not sure she would have been as happy at Berkeley, and I'm positive she would not have had the opportunities there that she's had at MIT.</p>
<p>
[quote]
And I'll disagree with the above post, which characterized Berkeley students as less capable. Berkeley admits around 8,000 undergrads per year in contrast to MIT's roughly 1,000, and there are many, many extremely bright students at Cal, students who chose Berkeley over Ivy-League schools.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Uh, I'm surprised this is even up for debate. I think even most Cal students would agree that the average undergrad at Cal is not as good as the average undergrad at MIT. </p>
<p>Granted, the top students at Cal are just as good as the students anywhere. But that's not the point. The point is that on average the quality of the Cal student pales in comparison. In particular, as I mentioned before, Cal is hurt by its long tail of relatively mediocre students. Certainly within that tail end are students who didn't have a choice of getting into an Ivy but ended up at Berkeley because, frankly, it was the best school they could get into. Yet those students still matter when it comes to assessing the strength of the program because they will compete with you for resources. </p>
<p>
[quote]
The EECS department admits only 6% of applicants, which makes it the most selective EECS department in the United States.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I'm afraid I don't find this to be relevant, as the vast majority of Cal students are obviously not EECS students. One has to fairly assess the entire school as a whole. The vast majority of students got in under a far less stringent admissions regime.</p>
<p>^^ I don't dispute the fact that admissions statistics for Berkeley and MIT show that the average MIT student has a higher SAT/ACT score.</p>
<p>The thing is even EECS students aren't as high caliber as MIT students.
I've seen many 1900s for SAT, who have got not so high GPA, no leadership, and they are not URMs get into EECS.
Is it really 6 % for EECS? Even with that said, I would still go to Berkeley over many privates schools anyday (excluding MIT of course)
I believe that one reason it percentages seems fairly low is that many people who were aiming for other UCs check the Berkeley box just to see if they can get in, those who think they have no chance to get in. If Berk had a different app from the other UCs, then there will be far less people applying.</p>
<p>But back to the main differences between undergrad and grad.... berkeley just have too many people for undergrad. there are many classes with 500+ people... and that is just a scary thought for me. the Average student would never have as many opportunities as an average MIT student.</p>
<p>And I understand when CalAlum said about teacher expect the class size to get smaller. I'm taking CC classes. In my math class, it started with 40 people, now only 20. And when we had our first mid term for physics, the teacher said " I might not seem some of you again". It seems as if the teachers expect you drop.</p>