<p>QW553,</p>
<p>I have been to Hong Kong and Macau a lot of times and experienced a one-day tour to Shanghai once in 2002. I'm pretty sure that people in Hong Kong and Macau hold a Berkeley degree in very high esteem, and I would even go far in saying that a Berkeley degree in those places are -- most of the times -- preferred than a degree from say, Duke or Brown and the like.</p>
<p>sansai,</p>
<p>What difference does it make to me if people in Macau think more highly of this school or that school if I have no interest in going there?!</p>
<p>Hell, nobody where I lived in Japan knew what UCLA was, but I couldn't have cared less...</p>
<p>UCLAri,</p>
<p>
[quote]
Let me ask you a question, then...why do the best American undergrads consistently choose the schools you moved out the way then? Are they all just dumb?
[/quote]
</p>
<p>No, they’re not dumb. I guess there are so many reasons why they choose to go to those schools. But elite students also apply to Berkeley and I do not see much difference between those who go to Berkley and those who go to Stanford. In fact, I turned down Stanford for Berkeley. Am I dumb? It was a matter of choice. My point is, Berkeley students are a smart and intelligent as any of those in the top private and LA colleges. And I just don’t bite it when someone says to me that one is better than the other because it offers better experiences… I hope you get when I mean. </p>
<p>
[quote]
How do I benefit? I get the same text as the kid at every other school, but instead of getting a full-time professor, I get some overworked lecturer/assistant prof.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>
[quote]
Princeton grads do a better job of getting great jobs and getting into the best grad schools. They must be doing something right over there.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>
[quote]
The thing you're missing is this: interaction with the top researchers is not mandated. It's not even guaranteed. It's RARE.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>
[quote]
Let me tell you a secret: Grad students at UCs get treated MUCH better than undergrads. I should know, I've experienced both sides.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I will try to verify this and if this is indeed true then I will concede.</p>
<p>UCLAri,</p>
<p>
[quote]
What difference does it make to me if people in Macau think more highly of this school or that school if I have no interest in going there?!</p>
<p>Hell, nobody where I lived in Japan knew what UCLA was, but I couldn't have cared less...
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I think we're going in circles now. That's why I emphasized it clearly in my previous posts that I am Japanese -- ASIAN -- and looking at the rankings made by US News & WR makes me sick because the ones that are ranked higher than Berkeley (and to some extent, UCLA and Michigan) are not known to me and my peers. I was just sharing my views and opinions, as an ASIAN. I even said "I'm just an onlooker". tsk-tsk-tsk...</p>
<p>QW553: could you blame me for assuming your response was directed at me if you began your post by quoting me?</p>
<p>Now that I've unruffled my feathers, I have to apologize. I didn't realize you were a foreigner. I have more tact than to insult a foreign exchange student's english (my father was a foreign exchange student, so i know how tough it is).</p>
<p>i didnt read all of the thread, but ...</p>
<p>can we all agree that there's a disparity between the overall prestige/name recognition of a UNIVERSITY and the quality of that university's undergraduate program? </p>
<p>berkeley is obviously one of the best grad programs in the world and in terms of prestige and name recognition in asia, it's probably top 5. however, its undergraduate program is generally regarded about where US News ranks it. </p>
<p>US News rankings are not meant to rank universities as a whole but rather the undergraduate programs. dont criticize a ranking for ranking something that's unrelated to said criticisms.</p>
<p>the peer assessment scores in the US News rankings give a somewhat better picture of UNIVERSITY prestige and overall strength (not perfect because the deans were supposed to be assessing undergraduate programs) </p>
<p>Harvard 4.9
MIT 4.9
Princeton 4.9
Stanford 4.9
Yale 4.9
Cal Tech 4.7
UC Berkeley 4.7
Columbia 4.6
Cornell 4.6
Johns Hopkins 4.6
Duke 4.5
Michigan 4.5
Penn 4.5
Brown 4.4
Dartmouth 4.4
Northwestern 4.4
Virginia 4.3
UCLA 4.3
Carnegie Mellon 4.2
Georgetown 4.1
Rice 4.1
Vanderbilt 4.1
Washington Univ. 4.1
Emory 4.0
Notre Dame 3.9</p>
<p>Ah the magical disappearing Chicago.</p>
<p>oops. good catch. i actually dont buy the US News rankings and was trying to look at that one scan that someone provided LOL</p>
<p>here's the list with chicago:</p>
<p>Harvard 4.9
MIT 4.9
Princeton 4.9
Stanford 4.9
Yale 4.9
Cal Tech 4.7
Chicago 4.7
UC Berkeley 4.7
Columbia 4.6
Cornell 4.6
Johns Hopkins 4.6
Duke 4.5
Michigan 4.5
Penn 4.5
Brown 4.4
Dartmouth 4.4
Northwestern 4.4
Virginia 4.3
UCLA 4.3
Carnegie Mellon 4.2
Georgetown 4.1
Rice 4.1
Vanderbilt 4.1
Washington Univ. 4.1
Emory 4.0
Notre Dame 3.9</p>
<p>note that there are universities that have peer assessment scores higher than notre dame, but i just included the traditional top 25 (top 26 this year)</p>
<p>sansai,</p>
<p>
[quote]
That's why I emphasized it clearly in my previous posts that I am Japanese -- ASIAN -- and looking at the rankings made by US News & WR makes me sick because the ones that are ranked higher than Berkeley (and to some extent, UCLA and Michigan) are not known to me and my peers.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>First of all, argumentum ad ignorantiam is a logical fallacy no matter how you shake it. Just because YOU personally haven't heard about Duke or Penn doesn't mean that they're not great schools. </p>
<p>Most Americans haven't heard of Keio, Waseda, or Sophia. Does that make them any less of schools in Japan?</p>
<p>You keep saying, "Oh, I'm Japanese, and this is MY opinion..." But opinions can be WRONG. They are not sacrosanct. Even the opinion of millions can be wrong. Instead of basing it on a fallacy of the majority, base it on objective analysis of the facts at hand.</p>
<p>Oh, and the number of people who choose Cal over Stanford is VERY low, so you're in an extremely small minority. It's fairly obvious that most students choose the best school they can get into, and whether we like it or not, that usually translates into the highest ranked school. </p>
<p>
[quote]
I even said "I'm just an onlooker". tsk-tsk-tsk...
[/quote]
</p>
<p>An onlooker who's made some pretty bold statements.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Let me ask you a question, then...why do the best American undergrads consistently choose the schools you moved out the way then? Are they all just dumb?
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Watch out, UCLAri, you're starting to sound like sakky.</p>
<p>DRab,</p>
<p>Upon graduating and looking at UCLA and Cal a bit more objectively, I started realizing that I have criticisms about both that I think can be remedied. One is the "brain drain" to privates...</p>
<p>UCLAri,</p>
<p>
[quote]
First of all, argumentum ad ignorantiam is a logical fallacy no matter how you shake it. Just because YOU personally haven't heard about Duke or Penn doesn't mean that they're not great schools.
[/quote]
Oh, come on. When did I say Duke, UPenn and the like are not great schools?? I have never said that nor would I ever say that in the future. Of course, they’re great schools by all means. However, as an Asian, I thought Berkeley is the better school and only Harvard has the edge. </p>
<p>
[quote]
Most Americans haven't heard of Keio, Waseda, or Sophia. Does that make them any less of schools in Japan?
[/quote]
NO, certainly not. But what I’m saying is, while you think Waseda and Keio are great schools, the reality is that they’re NOT Todai (University of Tokyo) or U of Kyoto. </p>
<p>
[quote]
You keep saying, "Oh, I'm Japanese, and this is MY opinion..." But opinions can be WRONG. They are not sacrosanct. Even the opinion of millions can be wrong. Instead of basing it on a fallacy of the majority, base it on objective analysis of the facts at hand.
[/quote]
Yes, opinions can be wrong. And since you're also banking on a premise of opinion, don’t you think you could also be wrong? </p>
<p>The facts you have at hand are facts, I won't question them. But we differ in the way we interpret the facts. There’s just one version of the bible. But why does the world has so many religions when there is just one bible? In our case, it's obvious that you put too much weight on experience. Okay fine. But some people don’t go to school JUST for the heck of experience. Duh!! Some people put a prime in academic
atmosphere, prestige, high quality research output and top-notch professors. So, whose opinion now is correct and whose is wrong? </p>
<p>You've noticed in my posts that I did educate you of my background. I hope you understand by now why there was a need for me to emphasize it. </p>
<p>
[quote]
Oh, and the number of people who choose Cal over Stanford is VERY low, so you're in an extremely small minority. It's fairly obvious that most students choose the best school they can get into, and whether we like it or not, that usually translates into the highest ranked school.
[/quote]
Stanford does not have the monopoly of smart students and I’m glad you recognized that, finally.</p>
<p>OK, given that unfounded, baseless claim of yours is correct, let me ask you a question then: *Just how smart are the Stanford guys compared to the Berkeley guys? *Would it REALLY, REALLY matter in the intelligence portion if those Stanford guys score one or two more points higher than their Berkeley counterparts? For instance, CALTECH has the highest SAT’s score in the US News ranking game; it even has a higher score than Harvard or MIT’s. So, how would you interpret that then? Does that mean to you that ONLY those CALTECH students are smart and those from Harvard and MIT peeps aren’t? Dude, if you’re smart, you’re smart. And that is that. Maybe the other guys scored a few more points now, but given a certain time, things would go different. Some people who into Harvard Law come from Berkeley, UCLA and the like, beating their Stanford peers in the selection process. So, where’s the Stanford-guys-are-smarter-than-the-Berkeley-guys you’re yelling out here then, ha???</p>
<p>
[quote]
Let me tell you a secret: Grad students at UCs get treated MUCH better than undergrads. I should know, I've experienced both sides.
[/quote]
OK, I have done my homework about this and I found out that this is NOT entirely true, at least at BERKELEY. </p>
<p>
[quote]
Who, in all fairness, would you move out of the way then?
[/quote]
I made a statement that I will rank Berkeley within the top 3 and I will stand by that previous statement of mine.
I will NOT and never trade a Berkeley degree with a Duke, Dartmouth, Brown and the like degree in today’s instant, because from my perspective, and from the perspective of the people where I will make a living someday, Berkeley is a very powerful qualification, and outside of Engineering and Sciences, only a Harvard qualification is more powerful than it.</p>
<p>
[quote]
NO, certainly not. But what I’m saying is, while you think Waseda and Keio are great schools, the reality is that they’re NOT Todai (University of Tokyo) or U of Kyoto.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Actually most Americans probably haven't heard of the University of Tokyo or the University of Kyoto either. I think the point UCLAri was trying to make is that public opinions can only go so far.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Some people put a prime in academic atmosphere, prestige, high quality research output and top-notch professors. So, whose opinion now is correct and whose is wrong? Now, you noticed in my posts that I did educate you of my background. I hope you understand by now why there was a need for me to emphasize my background so that people would know WHERE I am basing my opinion from.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>How is the academic atmosphere at Berkeley or UCLA better than the academic atmosphere at Brown or Duke or Penn? I might have reasons to believe the opposite, as the latter three can afford to be more selective and bring in a stronger student body overall. Of course, it also depend on the people with whom you surround yourself.</p>
<p>Also, I think it was already mentioned in this thread that Asian countries put a large emphasis into the sciences, research, and graduate schools. I believe this thread is concerned with the undergraduate education at large, as it is titled "US News 2007 Rankings," so in the context of this discussion, the opinions of many Asians become less valid as we are not talking about the same thing.</p>
<p>In sansai's defense, I think this is a rather pointless argument. Colleges mean different things to different people. If you are looking for a great engineering school, Harvard may not be your thing. If you are looking for a large bustling community filled with many knowledgeable grad students, the LACs may not be what you are looking for. It seems like sansai is looking for certain things and Berkeley provides it better than somewhere like Duke or Penn, so why try to convince him that the latter is better?</p>
<p>First of all, why do some of you keep saying that opinions can be wrong? How in the world can an opinion be wrong? My opinion may be wrong to you but then again your opinion can be wrong to me. </p>
<p>
[quote]
can we all agree that there's a disparity between the overall prestige/name recognition of a UNIVERSITY and the quality of that university's undergraduate program? </p>
<p>berkeley is obviously one of the best grad programs in the world and in terms of prestige and name recognition in asia, it's probably top 5. however, its undergraduate program is generally regarded about where US News ranks it.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>kfc,</p>
<p>You know I love you but I cannot agree nor will I ever that the quality of an undergraduate education at a school like UCLA or Berkeley is somehow necessarily inferior to smaller schools educations for undergrads. I know you didnt explicitly state that in your post but since I know that this is what some arguments here have been around here I can only assume that this is what you meant. Dont tell me you have fallen victim to the propaganda!?!?!?! I have argued in the past that some of the criticisms of UCLA and Berkeleys undergraduate programs dont hold much water. For some people the criticisms may be valid but for others they may not. For example, if person A prefers small classes and spoon feeding then UCLA/Cal may not be for them. If competition brings out the best in person B then spoon feeding may not be the best way to educate this person. Besides, there is plenty of spoon feeding at UCLA anyway if you want it. If person C would rather take advantage of a multitude of resources (per capita wealth is not always very important in my opinion) then a smaller school with lesser resources may not be a better fit for that person. Person D may rather be taught by the most famous faculty in the world and getting taught by a nobody professor just wont do. I can think of other things but hopefully you get the point. </p>
<p>The bottom line is this: Some schools are better for some people and some are not. I think the general consensus in the US is that UCLA and Cal have awesome UNDERGERADUATE programs. You can be persuaded that they generally dont but I have never heard a very good argument to the contrary. I have heard good arguments that may be applicable to some people but never arguments that are even remotely true across the board.</p>
<p>this is definitely a hoax</p>
<p>real rankings</p>
<p>ucla went down one, while usc went up.. now they're basically the same... 26th and 27th for ucla and usc, respectively.</p>
<p>why don't you go read the other thread that on this forum that says it's 26th?</p>
<p>Yay for doube posting about something that's totally pointless to begin with.</p>
<p>Some forumers have been reading at a slower pace than the rest of us, I see... :rolleyes:</p>
<p>
[quote]
First of all, why do some of you keep saying that opinions can be wrong? How in the world can an opinion be wrong?
[/quote]
</p>
<p>"My opinion is that the world is flat."</p>
<p>That opinion is utterly baseless and incorrect.</p>
<p>"The US economy is troubled and will be replaced by North Korea in a month."</p>
<p>This opinion is only partially true (e.g. the US economy has some snags.) The rest is clearly incorrect and based on faulty assumptions.</p>
<p>"Berkeley is much better than Princeton for undergrad"</p>
<p>This one is a bit harder. However, if we base it on things such as spending on students on a per capita basis, the average student's stats, resources, grad school placements, etc., we can say that it's very unlikely that it's true.</p>