USNews rankings

Colleges and Universities A-Z University of California - Berkeley
121

<p>LOL.. you're no longer on the offensive, sakky, but pure defensive. You've basically resorted to a lenthgy series of "why not's," but no longer making a case of "why" Berkeley should implement this program. </p>

<p>You know, I wrote a lengthy response, but I've decided to cut it down significantly. To be frank, I don't see the use. Everytime I read one of your posts, I'm sorry, but I'm always thinking that you sound like a five-year old trying to argue. It's like your trying to say, "Hey, if it's cold in the summer, can't we just sit over the stove?" It's like you're so stuck on trying to solve one problem, that you don't see the impact it would have on everything else. It's not so much this action would be unprecedented by Berkeley and, in your words, Cal would be "innovative" in doing so. No, no no no no no no! Will you just stop and listen to yourself? If you don't start considering just how detrimental this action would be for colleges in general - NO, not just confined to your little financial aid experiment- then your mind is operating on too parochial a manner to justify any comments you say here afterwards.</p>

<p>Someone said that you fail to see the "Big Picture" in your arguments; I'm inclined to say that is ridiculously true. You obviously don't see the "risks" aspect of your proposals. And no no no no, it has NOTHING to do with financial risks so stop throwing those retarded numbers around because they are beside the point! Gah. Just so you don't leave empty-handed, I'll answer the one actual question (besides the proverbial "why not?") you asked me:</p>

<p>"So it seems to me that you are simply proposing that schools continue to use their scholarships strategically to poach students away from other schools (like they do not), as long as they don't explicitly acknowledge that that's what they're doing. Is that your proposal?"</p>

<p>No, I never said anything remotely close to this. I'm saying schools should give merit money to kids who those schools think would most benefit from that particular school. If he/she happens to have been accepted to another school, then "so what?" If he/she happens to choose this school over that, then great! I still don't think you understand what it would mean if Berkeley starts giving special money to low-income students who happen to get into other top colleges.</p>

<p>So I'll stop posting until you think your proposal through a little more thoroughly. Best of luck,</p>

<p>TTG</p>

122

<p>Sakky, your opinion wasn't based on facts because you didn't know the facts.
Usually people gather the facts first, then form opinions.</p>

<p>You still don'tthe facts, do you? So your opinions are based on your opinion of facts you don't know.</p>

<p>Nice.</p>

123

<p>Clearly THES London Times ranking uses a more useful methodology than US NEws does. </p>

<p>The world is becoming more and more global with each passing second. Its time for US News to catch up with the new rules that THES London Times is playing by.</p>

124

<p>
[quote]
Sakky, your opinion wasn't based on facts because you didn't know the facts.
Usually people gather the facts first, then form opinions.</p>

<p>You still don'tthe facts, do you? So your opinions are based on your opinion of facts you don't know.</p>

<p>Nice.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Dstark, I saw the data from before, you asked for it, I didn't know where my original data was, so I found substantively similar data to prove my point. And my point is still an obvious one that few if any people would seriously dispute - namely that the more selective the school, the richer the student body tends to be, and in particular, that the student body at Berkeley is on average, indeed richer than that of San Jose State. Nothing more, nothing less.</p>

<p>Let me ask you. Do you know where the reference is for every single fact you have ever seen in your life? If you tell me something, anything, and I ask you to show me a reference, will you be able to present a reference to me immediately, every single time? I didn't think so. Nobody can. Just because you've read something doesn't mean that you can instantaneously recall where you saw it and then reproduce it. If you can't do it, why do you expect anybody else to be able to do it? </p>

<p>Besides, I fail to see how your comments are in any way relevant to the discussion, rather than just a presonal attack. Are you looking to get banned? Perhaps we should ask a moderator whether your comments are appropriate or not? It's one thing to say that you don't agree with me. For example, I have no problem with people ttiang15 disagreeing with me. It's quite another to go around insulting people. </p>

<p>
[quote]
LOL.. you're no longer on the offensive, sakky, but pure defensive. You've basically resorted to a lenthgy series of "why not's," but no longer making a case of "why" Berkeley should implement this program.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Because I've already said it many times. Berkeley ought to do it because it would allow them to fulfill their mandated charter of being an affordable school to Californians. If that charter doesn't count for anything, then why even have it? Let's rip it up, if you're not going to follow it. </p>

<p>
[quote]
It's like you're so stuck on trying to solve one problem, that you don't see the impact it would have on everything else. It's not so much this action would be unprecedented by Berkeley and, in your words, Cal would be "innovative" in doing so. No, no no no no no no! Will you just stop and listen to yourself? If you don't start considering just how detrimental this action would be for colleges in general - NO, not just confined to your little financial aid experiment- then your mind is operating on too parochial a manner to justify any comments you say here afterwards.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Again, I fail to see how it is detrimental. Why? You even admitted yourself that plenty of schools use their scholarships strategically to poach students away from other students. So it's happening already. The only difference is that the school does not explicitly say that that's what they're doing, but you even admitted yourself that that's what they're "secretly" doing. For example, I think most Caltech students, and even Caltech administrators would admit (off the record) that one of the most important uses of the Caltech merit scholarships is to poach students away from MIT. </p>

<p>The point is that by not implementing my policy, you are not banning it. IT'S ALREADY HAPPENING, AND WILL CONTINUE TO HAPPEN. Furthermore, I think we would all agree that right now, the UC's, especially the lower ones, use their RCS's to poach students away from higher UC's. Right? You don't seriously think that a strong motive for UCDavis to give a RCS to some students is to poach them away from Berkeley? </p>

<p>So, since you yourself have agreed that it's already happening, I would ask you to point out where this damage is that you keep alluding to? Where is the damage that Caltech is incurring? Where is the damage that UCDavis is incurring? </p>

<p>Secondly, we are not even talking about merit scholarships here. We're talking about financial aid. And, again, as I have discussed, it is a well known fact that right now, schools adjust their financial aid when they think they are going to lose a student to some other school. In fact, informed parents call that practice "Dialing for Dollars" - meaning to try to extract more aid from a particular school by threatening to send their kid elsewhere. Hence, the point is, as far as inter-school financial aid competition, IT'S ALREADY HAPPENING. So it's not like by not adopting my idea, we are going to stop whatever "damage" you keep alluding to by having schools competing against each other for aid. That horse left the barn a long tim ago. </p>

<p>
[quote]
Someone said that you fail to see the "Big Picture" in your arguments; I'm inclined to say that is ridiculously true. You obviously don't see the "risks" aspect of your proposals.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>And again, what are these risks? And how are they different from the Dialing for Dollars mentality that already exists? Or the use of merit scholarships by Caltech to lure students away from MIT? What's the difference? </p>

<p>
[quote]
No, I never said anything remotely close to this. I'm saying schools should give merit money to kids who those schools think would most benefit from that particular school. If he/she happens to have been accepted to another school, then "so what?" If he/she happens to choose this school over that, then great! I still don't think you understand what it would mean if Berkeley starts giving special money to low-income students who happen to get into other top colleges.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>And again, I think you fail to understand, or you don't want to understand, that schools are already manipulating their aid and/or their merit scholarships to poach students away from other schools. It's already happening! So this notion of schools giving away merit scholarships only to the best students is already dead in the water. You even admitted yourself that the UC's don't solely go around giving RCS's only to the best students, but rather that poaching students away from other schools is in fact part of the equation. </p>

<p>The point is, you keep talking about things as if everything if all pristine and immaculate and I am opening the door to a number of practices that have never existed before. You are conveniently forgetting that these practices already exist. They aren't explicit, but they already exist. Since they already exist, and will continue to exist, I see no harm in making it explicit.</p>

125

<p>Sakky, you said in post 98 that San Jose State educates more poor students than Berkeley. You are always complaining about Berkeley not being as generous as Harvard. </p>

<p>I asked you for facts to back this up.</p>

<p>You then asked me if I would like to bet that Berkeley educates more poor students than San Jose State. </p>

<p>So, how are we going to define poor students and how much are we going to bet? Averages don't tell us the number of poor kids because rich students can skew the numbers. You're an expert on numbers so I am sure you know that.</p>

<p>I'm calling you on the facts because you are the one that is always complaining about Berkeley and telling us the school should do better. </p>

<p>In order to know if the school should do better, we need to know the facts. Maybe, they are already doing things you are accusing them of not doing. Here is an example... does SJSU really educate more poor people than Berkeley? If Berkeley educates more poor people than SJSU, that would be a feather in Berkeley's cap. Don't you agree? After all, Berkeley is a more selective school and more selective schools have fewer poor students in their student bodies according to you.</p>

<p>Since you want Berkeley to match Harvard's free ride program, it makes sense to know how large that program is. So, how many kids at Harvard get free rides each year? Do any Berkeley students get free rides each year?</p>

<p>To save you time, you don't have to write paragraph after paragraph telling us why you think something is true. Just state the facts.</p>

126

<p>First off, I never used data on averages. I used data on medians. Medians are far less likely to be skewed by a few rich folks. </p>

<p>Secondly, why don't you tell me what is your reasonable definition of the word "poor", and then we can both go and try to find data about just how many such poor students there are at Berkeley and at SJSU. Surely you are not stating that you know that Berkeley educates more poor students than does SJSU? I happen to believe that data on median salary levels (not average salary levels, but median salary levels) is pretty useful. </p>

<p>And besides, you keep harping on how many students get free rides at Harvard. I admit, I don't know, and I never claimed to know. My point is - it doesn't really matter how many are in there, because Berkeley should match it no matter what the answer turns out to be. If the number is large, then that means that a lot of people are getting better deals at Harvard than at Berkeley, which I believe is a violation of the spirit of the UC charter. If it is only a few, then that means it is easy for Berkeley to match. </p>

<p>The point is, unlike apparently ttiang15, I believe that Berkeley has nothing to lose by matching Harvard, and potentially something to gain. At the very least, Berkeley would remain true to the charter. If people were opting for Harvard over Berkeley, at least it would not be because of price. Berkeley is supposed to be the affordable, high-quality option, so let's make it so.</p>

127

<p>i would like to know the facts too, like dstark says. exactly how many free rides does harvard give out? how do u know whether san jose, berkeley, or harvard gives out the most scholarships to poor students? from what I gather, you don't know... where are your statistics to back this up sakky?</p>

<p>you've done your fair share of asking others to back up their info. Now its time to back yours up. If you have no info to back it up, then you have to assume that everything you said is pure jibberish. You might as well write a fairy tale about a mightly noble unicorn that saves us from armageddon while your at it.</p>

128

<p>Sakky,</p>

<p>Do you work? If so, what exactly do you do because I want your job! 1,864 posts and still going strong (many of which are really long and involved). How, and when, do you have the time to write up these massive responses? I'm just curious.</p>

129

<p>Sakky, if Berkeley educates more poor people than San Jose State, are you going to give Berkeley kudos?</p>

130

<p>
[quote]
i would like to know the facts too, like dstark says. exactly how many free rides does harvard give out? how do u know whether san jose, berkeley, or harvard gives out the most scholarships to poor students? from what I gather, you don't know... where are your statistics to back this up sakky?</p>

<p>you've done your fair share of asking others to back up their info. Now its time to back yours up. If you have no info to back it up, then you have to assume that everything you said is pure jibberish. You might as well write a fairy tale about a mightly noble unicorn that saves us from armageddon while your at it.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>And when exactly did I say that I knew how many free scholarships any of these schools gave out? Why don't you point out my quote where I specifically said that I knew the number? What's that, you can't do it? I see. Oh I see. So who is the one who is spinning fairy tales and jibberish here? Keep it up, and I will get you banned (again). </p>

<p>Once again, I said that it doesn't matter whether Harvard gives out a lot of free scholarships or only a few. Either way, Berkeley should match. If it's a lot, then Berkeley is not exactly adhering to its supposed charter. If it's a few, then it's cheap for Berkeley to match. Either way, Berkeley ought to match. I never said that I knew how many of these scholarships are out there, but rather that no matter what the number is, Berkeley should match. </p>

<p>
[quote]
Sakky, if Berkeley educates more poor people than San Jose State, are you going to give Berkeley kudos?

[/quote]
</p>

<p>If Berkeley educates a HIGHER PERCENTAGE of poor people than does SJSU, then, sure, I will give Berkeley kudos. </p>

<p>Yet that's just a side issue. It still doesn't get to my central point, which is why Berkeley doesn't match Harvard's financial aid policy for poor people? I still have yet to hear of a convincing reason for why Berkeley shouldn't do this. From all the pushback I am getting on this point, I take it that you guys have a reason that Berkeley should not do it. So what would that reason be, pray tell ?</p>

131

<p>Berkeley educates more poor people and a higher percentage of poor people than San Jose State.</p>

<p>In order for Berkeley to match Harvard's free rides, we have to have some information. I am sure you have this information because you have been pushing this for a long time.</p>

<p>Does Harvard publicly state who gets the free rides? It is hard for Berkeley to match Harvard if Berkeley doesn't know who to match.
Since you want Berkeley to match Harvard please state where this information is available.</p>

<p>How many of the free ride people at Harvard also apply to Berkeley? How does Berkeley know this?</p>

<p>Where is the information that Berkeley doesn't match Harvard in financial aid for poor people?</p>

<p>How many poor people get aid at Berkeley? At Harvard?</p>

132

<p>There's a book on financial aid stats published by US News. If I remember correctly, Harvard gives 48% of the students financial aid and the average package is about $24,000/year. It's definitely a sizeable package. But that also means these 48% are still putting more than $12,000/year on average for Harvard education. The other 52% are paying full and most of them, I would guess, are pretty well-off (with income over 200K probably). Most top private colleges have similar stats. Sure, the private colleges seem to give generous aid to those who need it but they are able to do that because it's backed by a lot of the students from rich families that pay ridiculous amount of full-tuition.</p>

<p>It would be very difficult for me to imagine Berkeley, or any public university, has 52% of students coming from families that are able to finance full-tuition of Harvard. Harvard may not be what it used to be but it still have tons of students from upper-class families.</p>

133

<p>Wow, someone resurrected this beast. I'm getting confused just reading the last few posts since I appear to have missed a lot of the discussion. It appears, however, that sakky is wondering why Berkeley does not match Harvard's financial aid for "poor" people, whatever the hell that means. Whether or not this is true, I would like to give the (obvious) answer: because Berkeley is not Harvard. They don't have the same income, the same expenses, the same number of students, the same number of "poor" people applying, the same nearly anything. So why, exactly, should Berkeley match Harvard's policy or Harvard match Berkeley's policy on the issue? Shouldn't Berkeley and Harvard come up with their own policies that are feasible for their budgets?</p>

134

<p>Exactly. I have very limited knowledge about how colleges run their finances. But based on my little common sense, I agree with eudean. Berkeley's tuition is a lot more affortable and feasible for many families. You have to be pretty okay but don't have to be rich to finance its full tuition. Since Berkeley's full tuition is a lot cheaper, Berkeley's doesn't have as much money floating around out of these paying full-tuition like Harvard does. Hence, it has less funds available for generous full-rides. You just cant' fault Berkeley for that because its tuition is a lot more affortable to begin with.</p>

135

<p>Don't worry. Looking at all national universities, Berkeley is second in the country in educating poor people behind UCLA. It crushes Harvard.</p>

<p>I would like to see Sakky's answers from my post 131.</p>

136

<p>What do you mean 'all national universities'? I think the study you refer to is the following that talks about all highly ranked universities, not ALL universities.</p>

<p><a href="http://www.jbhe.com/features/45_pellgrant.html%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.jbhe.com/features/45_pellgrant.html&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

<p>And it is obviously true that Berkeley has a stronger reputation than SJSU. However that's a far cry from saying that Berkeley really educates more poor people (or a higher percentage of poor people) than does any other school. More than any highly prestigious schools (except UCLA) ? Yeah. More than any schools period? Doubtful. </p>

<p>
[quote]
In order for Berkeley to match Harvard's free rides, we have to have some information. I am sure you have this information because you have been pushing this for a long time.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>No, I never said I had this information. My point is, why do you need it? So let's say that number is huge. So should Berkeley not match? Or, let's say the number is zero. So should Berkeley not match?</p>

<p>My point is, no matter what the final number turns out to be, Berkeley should match. Hence, we don't need any data about the final data, because it is irrelevant to the question of whether Berkeley should match. </p>

<p>I'll put it to you another way. So what range of numbers would you say it is then appropriate for Berkeley to match, and why is that range appropriate? What does it matter what the final number is? </p>

<p>
[quote]
So why, exactly, should Berkeley match Harvard's policy or Harvard match Berkeley's policy on the issue? Shouldn't Berkeley and Harvard come up with their own policies that are feasible for their budgets?

[/quote]
</p>

<p>
[quote]
Since Berkeley's full tuition is a lot cheaper, Berkeley's doesn't have as much money floating around out of these paying full-tuition like Harvard does. Hence, it has less funds available for generous full-rides. You just cant' fault Berkeley for that because its tuition is a lot more affortable to begin with

[/quote]
</p>

<p>And perhaps you'd like to review one of my old posts in this thread where I actually calculate the cost to Berkeley. Allow me to review it. Harvard admits about 1500 new freshman per year. Let's say that 10% of them (or 150) are getting a free ride. I think that number is too large, but let's use it. Then let's say that all 150 of them also come from California (the free ride only extends to California residents). This is also a ridiculous assumption because obviously many of that 150 poor students who get into Harvard will not be from California, but let's use the assumption anyway. So to fully match, Berkeley would have to provide a maximum 150 free rides *$22,000 a year each for instate residents for a total of $33 million. I'm sorry, but that is not a lot of money. </p>

<p>And let's investigate all my assumptions. The biggest assumption is that all 150 of them will choose Berkeley. I think we can all agree that that is invalid. Harvard decisively wins the cross-admit battle with Berkeley, even when Harvard costs more. Imagine getting a full ride at both Harvard and Berkeley, I think we can all agree that most people would choose Harvard. The point is that very few people would take the Berkeley full ride. Hence, the 'true' cost of this policy will be substantially lower than $33 million.</p>

<p>So now you might say, well, if Harvard is going to win the cross-admit battle anyway, then why do it? The answer is because at least Berkeley tried. At least Berkeley was not beaten on price. People will then choose Harvard because they think Harvard is a better school, not because Harvard is both better AND cheaper. You might say that that's an empty gesture, but, hey, an empty gesture is better than nothing.</p>

137

<p>Sakky, how does Berkeley match Harvard if it doesn't know who to match? Nobody can match what they don't know.
I didn't say Berkeley is second in the country in educating poor people did I? Don't change what I said.
You like to tell Berkeley what is good for the school without even knowing the facts.
Berkeley looks pretty good on your pell grant list, doesn't it? A lot better than Harvard looks with all its free rides.</p>

<p>Berkeley educates more poor people and in higher percentages than San Jose State. Another factual error by you. I missed the part where you gave Berkeley kudos.</p>

<p><a href="http://www.today.ucla.edu/2004/040511news_affordable.html%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.today.ucla.edu/2004/040511news_affordable.html&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

<p>In case you miss it... “These universities have demonstrated that institutional excellence and commitment to enrolling students from low-income families are mutually achievable,” said Mortenson in Postsecondary Education Opportunity. “These universities put the poor records of the best national universities in the rest of the country to shame.”</p>

<p>"These universities" include the one you like to trash without knowing facts.</p>

138

<p>
[quote]
Sakky, how does Berkeley match Harvard if it doesn't know who to match? Nobody can match what they don't know.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Why? Like I said, even in the absolute worst case scenario, the matching would not cost that much. Why can't you proceed without having all the information, when the information isn't going to change the decision anyway? Or are you saying that the information will change the decision? </p>

<p>
[quote]
I didn't say Berkeley is second in the country in educating poor people did I? Don't change what I said.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>No, but you did say, (and you say again) that Berkeley educates a greater percentage of poor people than does SJSU. Since you're the one saying this emphatically, I assume you have proof of this. I presented my evidence previously, so I assume you have countervailing evidence? If not, then who's making the factual errors? </p>

<p>Look, does Berkeley, overall, serve more poor people than do other elite privates? Sure. I never said that it didn't. But that still doesn't answer the question of why Berkeley should or should not match the Harvard problem. Since you're the one who seems to be objecting the most, I presume that you have a good reason for why Berkeley should not match. So let's hear it. Don't try to hide behind "well, we don't know the numbers". If that's really your answer, then why don't you state your reasoning as a conditional answer - i.e., if the numbers are X, then here's what Berkeley should do and why, and if the numbers are Y, then here's what Berkeley should do and why. You can't just hide behind the lack of information to never give an answer.</p>

139

<p>Sakky, haven't we gone over this topic to death? First, we're baseing all of this on hypotheticals. I agree that if somehow Harvard and Berkeley shared an applicant who would be eligable for harvards free ride, and harvard would share that infro with berkeley, then it wouldn't be a bad idea for berkeley to say, "hey, will match that." But they don't do that, so it doesn't really matter. Why not spend time an energy thinking about things that are feasible, like improving the transfer of data from one department to another, because I know for a fact that that would affect more Cal students in a positive way than giving free rides to people that wouldn't take them anyway. Find me one person that, if offered the choice, would go to Cal instead of Harvard if both were free. Its insane! Maybe stanford, maybe princeton, but not harvard. I'm not even confinced that Harvard is the better school, especially after hearing about how dissatisfied their students are, but c'mon, its Harvard. Nobody turns down Harvard!</p>

140

<p>To reiterate my evidence from before:</p>

<p>""...[in 1995, it was reported by the CRO] that the median family income of entering African-American freshmen at UCBerkeley was found to be $35,000,... that of entering Chicano freshman was about $33,971...and that of Caucasian freshman was about $80,000...and that of Asian freshman and freshmen who chose not to identify themselves was $76940. ...[In 1995], the median family of entering African-American freshmen at San Jose State University was found to be $31510...that of entering Chicano freshman was $28715...and the family income of entering Asian and white freshman was $69,515..."</p>

<p>It seems to me that the average student at SJSU is indeed poorer than the average student at Berkeley. I would like to see countervailing evidence that this is not true and that the average student at SJSU is actually richer than the average student at Berkeley.</p>