US News 2007 Rankings Leaked: UCLA 24th

Colleges and Universities A-Z University of California - Los Angeles
81

<p>
[quote]
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?

[/quote]
</p>

<p>That's not my point, really. My point is to demonstrate that her argument is based on fallacious reasoning to begin with (fallacy of the majority, argumentum ad ignorantiam, etc.) What sansai seems to be ignoring isn't the fact that I'm saying that Cal is "bad" or somehow deficient, but that US News isn't necessarily "wrong" in placing it where it is.</p>

82

<p>
[quote]
Oh, come on. When did I say Duke, UPenn and the like are not great schools??

[/quote]
</p>

<p>I never said that. Don't put words in my mouth. </p>

<p>
[quote]
However, as an Asian, I thought Berkeley is the better school and only Harvard has the edge.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Okay...</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>Way to miss my point. </p>

<p>
[quote]
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?

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Yes, interpretation can affect the outcome of an argument. However, there are a few key differences between the Bible and this:</p>

<p>-- repeatable, quantitative data
-- verifiability
-- no supernatural outside forces acting</p>

<p>Bad analogy. </p>

<p>
[quote]
Stanford does not have the monopoly of smart students and I’m glad you recognized that, finally.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>When did I say otherwise? You're awfully good at putting words in people's mouths. You should consider punditry. :rolleyes:</p>

<p>
[quote]
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?

[/quote]
</p>

<p>How is my claim baseless when Stanford has a much better yield rate than Berkeley? And that the average admit to Stanford typically has higher scores? Explain how it's baseless...please. </p>

<p>And again, you're missing the point. It's not necessarily JUST the student body that matters (though I'll get to that in a sec), it's the fact that American students typically recognize that certain schools will offer them better resources and opportunities for getting what they want/need. That, and if I could've gone to UCLA/Cal without the bottom 25th percentile, I would've. Oh, wait...that's privates. </p>

<p>
[quote]
or 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?

[/quote]
</p>

<p>This is a bit of a non sequitur, but I'll field it anyway. CalTech tends to attract a VERY specific breed of student. It also doesn't have any significant numbers of athletes or legacies to drag down its scores. But CalTech is a bit of an outlier, so it's easy to overlook it in a statistical measure. </p>

<p>
[quote]
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???

[/quote]
</p>

<p>SOME. But look at the averages. Look at how much more successful Harvard, Princeton, Yale, etc. are at getting their undergrads into the top grad programs. WITH SMALLER CLASSES. There are over twice as many Yale grads at HLS, and almost FOUR TIMES as many Harvard grads at HLS than Cal or UCLA. You'd think that with such huge undergrad classes, the top public students would be sending far more.. but they're not. Look at top PhD programs as well. Top LACs and privates are overwhelmingly represented.</p>

<p>What explains this? Is this just mean old privates picking on Cal and UCLA?</p>

<p>
[quote]
OK, I have done my homework about this and I found out that this is NOT entirely true, at least at BERKELEY.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>There are exceptions to every rule, but the fact remains that grad students will ALWAYS get better attention, financial aid, and perks than undergrads. That's how Cal gets students to come from Harvard who gets students to come from Yale. But what do I know? :rolleyes:</p>

<p>
[quote]
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.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Well, I hope for your sake that reality doesn't hit you like a ton of bricks like it hit me. Good luck, and if you ever want to go to grad school, then I recommend you start going to office hours... a lot.</p>

83

<p>There seem to be a few misunderstandings of what college rankings are supposed to mean. College rankings are supposed to rate colleges based on how well they perform on certain criteria. These criteria are designed to reflect that college's overall academic utility. They do not test name recognition<em>, they do not test the intelligence of the student body</em><em>, and they do not test personal subjective beliefs about universities</em>**.
All they do is test the academic resources and facilities available to a student.
Nobody is arguing that a dedicated and intelligent student cannot excel at any decent school. Hell, a sufficiently dedicated and intelligent student can excel even without going to school. (But that's besides the point.)</p>

<p>Moreover, being a few numbers off on a ranking doesn't mean much. One top 20 school is pretty much as good as any other. At that point it just comes down to what you make of it.</p>

<p>Most of this is just people trying to measure their alma mater's figurative ***** size to make themselves feel more school-spirity or something.</p>

<p>*
[quote]
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.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>**
[quote]
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.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>***
[quote]
However, as an Asian, I thought Berkeley is the better school and only Harvard has the edge.

[/quote]
</p>

84

<p>Oh, and one more point...</p>

<p>I loved UCLA. I probably am its second-biggest fan (next to my uncle.) But I have to be honest and realize that there are schools out there that offer the vast majority of their students better resources and opportunities than UCLA. I mean, I would've loved to have had the sort of inherent networking at Princeton, or the big names at Harvard, or the great options for internships at Columbia.</p>

<p>The point isn't to say that UCLA is a bad school. Or that Cal is a bad school. Far from it. But I find it hard to believe that schools like Penn, Duke, Columbia, Stanford, MIT, and CalTech aren't doing something right when I see them kicking so much ass in grad school admissions, jobs, and so forth.</p>

<p>Like Pavs said, however, you can succeed anywhere. And Cal does provide great tools. But for undergrad it seems pretty clear that other schools provide somewhat shinier and better tools.</p>

85

<p>
[quote]
Person D may rather be taught by the most famous faculty in the world and getting taught by a nobody professor just wont do.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>I'd rather get taught by someone who can teach...but that's just me I suppose. </p>

<p>
[quote]
I think the general consensus in the US is that UCLA and Cal have awesome UNDERGERADUATE programs.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>I don't think any of us have said otherwise. Just because A is better than B doesn't mean that B can't be great. I mean, it's arguable that Tiger Woods is a better golfer than Vijay Singh. It doesn't mean that Singh isn't an amazing golfer. He'd beat pretty much any of us anytime. He's just not quite as good as Tiger. Get it?</p>

<p>
[quote]
I have heard good arguments that may be applicable to some people but never arguments that are even remotely true across the board.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>These are never "one size fits all" situations. But nothing really is. We have to look at broad populations and a lot of data to come to general conclusions. Nothing wrong with that.</p>

86

<p>UCLAri,</p>

<p>
[quote]
"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.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>That is NOT opinion, that’s plain lack of knowledge and ignorance. To say that the world is flat despite the discovery that it is indeed spherical, is malicious and deserved to be hanged just like in the olden days. (No, I’m just joking.) But, yes, it is ignorance. </p>

<p>Our case is different. We have the SAME facts (Remember the bible example?) but we just have a conflicting opinion which amongst the given criteria should weigh more than the others. You put toooooooooooo much emphasis on experience, an area where I think is the least for COLLEGE education criterion. If you want experience, join a social club, don’t do it through college, or don’t make your college a prime medium for it. Unless you’re saying you can’t afford to join one, then I would understand why you’re behaving this way and having that kind of OPINION. But just the same, I don’t agree with that opinion of yours because I believe that academic prestige, research output, quality of the professors, etc, etc… are more important in determining which is the better ACADEMIC institution. Again, ACADEMIC institution, not some kind of social club or whatever is it you’re after from an ACADEMIC institution.</p>

87

<p>If you believe that's what determines the better academic insitution, that's just ignoring reality. Reality is, you learn from your peers too as well as from alums. C'mon, there's a reason why business schols group students in cohorts.</p>

<p>Sansai, just let it go. You know... you are up against a grad student, and he knows his stuff. Furtheremore, he most likely took a critical thinking class during his undergraduate years and aced it (I just took one over the summer and it looks familiar).</p>

88

<p>UCLAri,</p>

<p>
[quote]
I loved UCLA. I probably am its second-biggest fan (next to my uncle.)

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Owwws, you do?? Tell me, aside from your insistence in declaring to the world that your alma mater school (UCLA) pales in comparison to the likes of Emory, Duke, Washington, Dartmouth, etc.. what else have you done for your school so people would believe to this another suspicious claim of yours???</p>

89

<p>what are you trying to point out?</p>

90

<p>TonyLTH12,</p>

<p>
[quote]
If you believe that's what determines the better academic insitution, that's just ignoring reality. Reality is, you learn from your peers too as well as from alums. C'mon, there's a reason why business schols group students in cohorts.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>If you believe experience weigh more than quality of faculty, research output, prestige, etc.etc., well, that’s your own personal belief. Apparently, there are people in the other side of the globe who do not jibe with yours, so accept it. </p>

<p>
[quote]
Sansai, just let it go. You know... you are up against a grad student, and he knows his stuff. Furtheremore, he most likely took a critical thinking class during his undergraduate years and aced it (I just took one over the summer and it looks familiar).

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Oh, come on. Just because he aced his stuff he’s always right, and therefore, we should all agree with his opinion at all times. That's crap man. What’s the point of educating yourself if you just have to agree with the opinion of someone you don’t think is correct??? </p>

<p>BTW, I also have sources and I seriously and honestly think that they're wayyyyyyyyyy better than him. I respect his opinion but he has to respect mine too.</p>

91

<p>"Sansai, just let it go. You know... you are up against a grad student, and he knows his stuff. Furtheremore, he most likely took a critical thinking class during his undergraduate years and aced it (I just took one over the summer and it looks familiar)."</p>

<p>what the hell does this have to do with anything?</p>

92

<p>UCLAri,</p>

<p>
[quote]
I never said that. Don't put words in my mouth.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>I interpreted what you said and implied.
When you implied that I argued that Duke, UPenn and the like are NOT great schools, wouldn’t that be like saying that I DON’T think they’re great schools?? </p>

<p>
[quote]
Way to miss my point.

[/quote]

What?? This is what you previously said:</p>

<p>Most Americans haven't heard of Keio, Waseda, or Sophia. Does that make them any less of schools in Japan?</p>

<p>This was my answer:</p>

<p>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>Which point did I miss when I agreed with you that their being unpopular in America does not make them any less of a school in Japan?? But in that statement, you already presumed that I already agreed with you that Duke and the like are more popular than Berkeley. I do not think so. Other than that of US News ranking game, Berkeley is more prestigious than Duke and the like. Notice that the ranking was done in combination of both grad and undergrad. </p>

<p>
[quote]
When did I say otherwise? You're awfully good at putting words in people's mouths. You should consider punditry.

[/quote]

I was making a statement, don’t be too sensitive. And I was appreciative that we finally have agreed on it so it would be easy for me to continue then.</p>

<p>
[quote]
How is my claim baseless when Stanford has a much better yield rate than Berkeley? And that the average admit to Stanford typically has higher scores? Explain how it's baseless...please. </p>

<p>And again, you're missing the point. It's not necessarily JUST the student body that matters (though I'll get to that in a sec), it's the fact that American students typically recognize that certain schools will offer them better resources and opportunities for getting what they want/need. That, and if I could've gone to UCLA/Cal without the bottom 25th percentile, I would've. Oh, wait...that's privates.

[/quote]

Weren’t’ you implying previously that Stanford has a better student body than Berkeley’s, more intelligent because of the higher SAT scores and GPA? So, what’s the point in saying that Standford has a better yield rate than Berkeley and the average admit to Stanford typically has higher scores, etc, etc…?? </p>

<p>Based on the stats provided by US News, Stanford has an edge. I agree. But my question to you is: Just how smart are the Stanford guys compared to the Berkeley guys?</p>

<p>Please answer this because US News did put a weight on student selectivity. This has some bearing to ranking schools but I do not think that 1.) It should weigh significantly and 2.) I’d like to be able to establish the gap whether it is significant or not. Because for all I know, Berkeley is also very selective. In fact, the US News surveys labeled its selectivity: MOST SELECTIVE.</p>

<p>
[quote]
SOME.

[/quote]

That’s just what I needed to know, thank you. So, there are Berkeley grads that beat Stanford grads in Harvard grad school’s selection process. </p>

<p>
[quote]
But look at the averages. Look at how much more successful Harvard, Princeton, Yale, etc. are at getting their undergrads into the top grad programs. WITH SMALLER CLASSES. There are over twice as many Yale grads at HLS, and almost FOUR TIMES as many Harvard grads at HLS than Cal or UCLA.

[/quote]

Show me that figures.</p>

<p>
[quote]
There are exceptions to every rule, but the fact remains that grad students will ALWAYS get better attention, financial aid, and perks than undergrads. That's how Cal gets students to come from Harvard who gets students to come from Yale. But what do I know?

[/quote]

This is what you say. However, this is what others say. And who knows, what you’re saying here holds the same for some Stanford students who crossed enrolled to Berkeley grad school. So what gives?&lt;/p&gt;

<p>
[quote]
Well, I hope for your sake that reality doesn't hit you like a ton of bricks like it hit me. Good luck, and if you ever want to go to grad school, then I recommend you start going to office hours... a lot.

[/quote]

HA HA HA……….. Don’t worry. I’m sure as hell that in a place where I come from and will make a living in the future, Berkeley (and to some extent, UCLA) are well regarded and can anytime trounce applicants from lesser prestigious schools like Duke, Dartmouth, Brown, Washington and the like. </p>

<p>For this statement: * "I hope for your sake that reality doesn't hit you like a ton of bricks like it hit me" *, I think it's not fair to blame your alma mater school -- UCLA -- for that. That's very childish...</p>

93

<p>"HA HA HA……….. Don’t worry. I’m sure as hell that in a place where I come from and will make a living in the future, Berkeley (and to some extent, UCLA) are well regarded and can anytime trounce applicants from lesser prestigious schools like Duke, Dartmouth, Brown, Washington and the like."</p>

<p>please... i dont even know where to begin...</p>

<p>"For this statement: "I hope for your sake that reality doesn't hit you like a ton of bricks like it hit me" , I think it's not fair to blame your alma mater school -- UCLA -- for that. That's very childish..."</p>

<p>where did blame come into play?</p>

94

<p>sansai,</p>

<p>
[quote]
Other than that of US News ranking game, Berkeley is more prestigious than Duke and the like.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Depends on your location. Berkeley's prestige is somewhat diminished in the South and in some parts of the world.</p>

<p>
[quote]
Based on the stats provided by US News, Stanford has an edge. I agree. But my question to you is: Just how smart are the Stanford guys compared to the Berkeley guys?

[/quote]
</p>

<p>It's not that Stanford has a whole population that's just tons smarter than Cal or UCLA. It's that they don't have the awful bottom 25th percentile that the top publics do. That, and their average overall is about an entire SD over...But that's not just raw intelligence, per se. Sometimes it's just hard work.</p>

<p>
[quote]
That’s just what I needed to know, thank you. So, there are Berkeley grads that beat Stanford grads in Harvard grad school’s selection process.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Of course. But Berkeley and UCLA both lose out quite a bit to LACs and the top 10 or so. Just look at the top PhD programs nationwide and see for yourself how packed they are with grads from schools like HPYMS, and the top LACs. Or don't. The facts are still the same either way.</p>

<p>
[quote]
Show me that figures.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Simple</a> enough. Now explain that. Also explain the fact that it has been demonstrated through Cal's OWN stats that it usually takes Cal grads higher GPAs to get into top schools for grad.</p>

<p>
[quote]
This is what you say. However, this is what others say. And who knows, what you’re saying here holds the same for some Stanford students who crossed enrolled to Berkeley grad school. So what gives?

[/quote]
</p>

<p>The point is that the grad experience at Cal cannot be directly compared to the undergrad experience. Saying that the poli sci department is uber doesn't mean that the poli sci undergrad is treated the same as the poli sci grad. Grad students mean a lot more to the university. It's only logical that they get better treatment. I don't see how this can be argued.</p>

<p>
[quote]
HA HA HA……….. Don’t worry. I’m sure as hell that in a place where I come from and will make a living in the future, Berkeley (and to some extent, UCLA) are well regarded and can anytime trounce applicants from lesser prestigious schools like Duke, Dartmouth, Brown, Washington and the like.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>I hope that for your sake it's not a US grad school, then. Because you'll be sorely disappointed. Competition is fierce, and it's even worse if you're not one of the best of the best at Cal to begin with. </p>

<p>
[quote]
I think it's not fair to blame your alma mater school -- UCLA -- for that. That's very childish...

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Who assigned blame? Again with words in my mouth.</p>

95

<p>
[quote]
where did blame come into play?

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Thank you.</p>

96

<p>oh i like this discussion. i like the very well researched and accurate information that flopsy is spreading. i really like thsi debate you lot have going here, so civil yet so heated. you guys have restored my faith in this generation, really.</p>

97

<p>Good for you?</p>

98

<p>:rolleyes:</p>

99

<p>
[quote]
"My opinion is that the world is flat.” </p>

<p>That opinion is utterly baseless and incorrect.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Please don’t confuse opinions with facts. If the world is not flat then it is not flat. If it is flat then it is flat. The fact can be wrong but the opinion cannot because it is what the person thinks. Basically, when you are saying that an opinion is wrong you are saying that a person does not believe what he/she believes. </p>

<p>Besides, on a philosophical level one can probably argue that the world is indeed flat. (e.g. if it is true in my reality then how can it be untrue in my reality at the same time. In my mind the only thing that exists is my reality. Your reality is important to you but my reality is what is important to me.) In fact, there are people out there who actually believe the world is flat. What if they are right and we are all wrong?</p>

<p>Still, facts are facts.</p>

<p>
[quote]
"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.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>This is more like an opinion. Do you know there some economists that say the US economy is not in trouble right now? I work in finance and read the Wall Street Journal every day and trust me when I say that economists don’t always agree on everything. If economists cannot agree then how you say that you know more than them? Shoot! We don’t even know we are in a recession until over 6 months later. By definition, a recession is 2 consecutive quartets of negative growth. We don’t even have that data until we measure it which is much later than when we are officially in a recession.</p>

<p>Oh, and about the second part of your two part example. Next month has not happened yet. We don’t know what is going to happen. The probability may be super close to zero of that particular future event happening but since it has not happened yet we don’t for a fact know that it will not happen. It is just super-duper-highly unlikely.</p>

<p>
[quote]
"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.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>This is not a fact. This is an opinion even though it is not preceded by “It is my opinion that…” Some people may believe this is true but while people may not. This is a perfect example of how opinions cannot be wrong.</p>

<p>I think we would waste everyones time if we got into an argument on facts vs opinions. I think I am going to tap out right now before it gets further. You can respond if you want to but it would really stray from the subject.</p>

100

<p>ya know, shoot me for me for saying this, but I think Sansai and UCLAri would have a very interesting date together. Actually, they could almost be one of those old married couples bickering. (I was just wondering-please don't take any offense)</p>