<p>yeah, viccis,</p>
<p>i didn't mean to say that uva got a higher proportion of applications and therefore is better, what i (which i thought clearly) stated was that the number of applications a school gets has nothing to do with how good it is. I was just making the point that uva receives a higher proportion of potential applicants because its an absurd argument to make that one school is better than another.</p>
<p>There is an awful lot of repetition and spewing statistics in this discussion.
I think that it is safe to say that the average Berkeley student and the average UVa student are quite different people. (Allowing, of course, for deviations, that's why I said "average") </p>
<p>Two different undergrad experiences, two very different areas of the country, different types of students would prefer one or the other for any number of personal and general reasons.</p>
<p>They are both great schools. If you go to either, great job. You will get a good education with a good name attached to it.</p>
<p>And defending your school on an online message board isn't going to change YOUR undergrad experience.</p>
<p>^ I concur with kschnitz.</p>
<p>^ I concur with hairypotty's concurence.</p>
<p>Hahaha…we do spew out a lot of info.</p>
<p>
[quote]
I don't see why you feel like praising UVa and belittling Berkeley at every turn?
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Vicissitudes, I don't have anything against Berkeley. I think it’s a good school…definitely under-ranked in US News in my opinion. Read my previous posts, you don't see me posting hateful and negative comments about any UC schools. I just can’t stand cocky posters (read: Communist Smurf) who claim their school is better based on misinformation. My post was meant to show that UVa does stand up to Berkeley and in some areas outshines it. (i.e. Berkeley's 52% 4 year graduation rate vs. UVA’s 83%.)</p>
<p>
[quote]
Did you mention even one positive of Berkeley?
[/quote]
</p>
<p>My post was meant for Communist Smurf who didn’t bother to post anything positive about UVa either – and in the UVa section mind you. I’m sure a smart motivated student can get a great education at Berkeley. </p>
<p>
[quote]
I am curious, however, as to why you decided to focus on the Rhodes Scholars.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I chose to look at Rhodes Scholarships because it is one of the most prestigious awards a college student could win. I could have easily referred to the Wall Street Journal study showing UVa having a better placement in “top graduate school programs” (i.e. Wharton, Yale Law, Johns Hopkins Medical School, etc.) than Berkeley. </p>
<p>I’m sure there are areas where Berkeley outshines UVa – probably in engineering and sciences.</p>
<p>
[quote]
The question is: how many does UVa give out? UVa caps the amount of need-based loans. So basically UVa makes the decision for the student as to how much loan is given out. If the student needed more, too bad. Berkeley gives the STUDENT the choice as how much to take out. If the student is afraid of landing too deep into dept, then he can choose to take out less loans. So explain to me now how choice is a bad thing?
[/quote]
</p>
<p>If you’re a middle-class student, UVa will cap your need-based loans at around $15,000 for 4 years. Any amount of need above that is replaced with grants, which don’t have to be repaid. This goes for out-of-state students as well. If you’re a low-income instate or out-of-state student, you are eligible for a free-ride or near free-ride to UVa. One poster here on CC is attending UVa from New York on a full-ride and is getting a free laptop. Last year, a girl from California chose to come to UVa and was asked to only pay $1,000/year to attend. The rest was covered with grants.</p>
<p>You should check out AccessUVA: <a href="http://www.virginia.edu/accessuva/%5B/url%5D">http://www.virginia.edu/accessuva/</a></p>
<p>
[quote]
I think it's commonly accepted that Berkeley has a stronger faculty than UVa.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Eh…maybe. This reputation is based on the research that Berkeley faculty conducts more than teaching, but how much are Berkeley students benefiting from these professors, who may focus more on their research than their undergraduate students? Plus, how much are Berkeley students benefiting from these professors when they can’t get into their classes which keeps them from graduating on time? </p>
<p>
[quote]
But wait, didn't you just talk about how great the research at UVa is? Now you are discrediting it?
[/quote]
</p>
<p>No, I’m not discrediting UVA’s research. Berkeley is known as a great research university, and much of its reputation which elevates its US News Peer Assessment is based on its research. UVa is not as well-known as a research university as it is for being a school that has great teacher-student interaction. Nonetheless, UVa offers its students a lot of research opportunities – including international opportunities from being a member of Universitas 21.</p>
<p>I love UVA and I definitely love Berkeley. If people insist on proving that one is better than the other, leave the US News Rankings out of the discussion. The peer assessment score is always cited as the major flaw, but another problem is in the data reported. Someone brought this to my attention last year and I tucked it away...</p>
<p>
[QUOTE]
4059 were freshman in Fall 2005 at Berkeley
99% are reported to US News as being in the top decile (leaving 40 students below the top decile)</p>
<p>260 admitted students are athletes (according to the 2005</a> Athletic Admissions Policy)
80% of athletes did not meet admission criteria (see one quarter of the way down this</a> self-study document)</p>
<p>There's some funny wording on those documents, but a reasonable conclusion might be that 208 incoming students last fall didn't meet the admission criteria. That's 5% of the incoming class. I think reporting 99% of the class as ranking in the top decile of their high school class is a problem.</p>
<p>
[QUOTE]
Please find NCAA Self Study Academic Standards 2.1.2, C, Part I-B and Part I-C, documenting the institution's admissions profiles of student athletes who received athletics grants-in-aid with the entering freshman students in general for the three most recent academic years: 2003-2004, 2004-2005, and 2005-2006.
[/QUOTE]
Unfortunately, the document with the hard data isn't online. At some point, someone will make a "Freedom of Information Act" request to get the raw numbers and analyze them. Until then, we have another reason to be wary of US News' rankings.
[/QUOTE]
</p>
<p>Here's my view:</p>
<p>UVa and Berkeley are both exceptional schools. PERIOD.
Some prefer UVa over Berkeley and vice versa. PERIOD.
UVa is a much smaller school than Berkeley. PERIOD.
Both UVa and Berkeley have their advantages, and both have their shortcomings. PERIOD.</p>
<p>Case closed. Although I prefer UVa. Why does one have to be better than the other? And even if one was indeed better than the other the difference is so miniscule that it's a nonissue.</p>
<p>LOL! Nicely said FutureNYUStudent.</p>
<p>I apologize if offended any Berkeley people. Communist Smurf just ****ed me off.</p>
<p>
[quote]
UVa and Berkeley are both exceptional schools. PERIOD.
Some prefer UVa over Berkeley and vice versa. PERIOD.
Both UVa and Berkeley have their advantages, and both have their shortcomings. PERIOD.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Yes to this.</p>
<p>Hopefully everyone who reads this thread will get past much of the problematic and just plain false information that was posted throughout.</p>
<p>Come to think of it, much of it wasn't corrected.</p>
<p>Neither is Harvard. We both suck.</p>
<p>^^ Not being Harvard does not suck...infact I would prefer UVA over Harvard undergrad anyday (unless Harvard offers me a full ride and UVA doesn't...but if they both cost the same and I got into both...Call me a Cavalier). I really don't like how college rankings and statistics factor into people's decisions. This whole topic's controversy was based around statistics and the people who said that a college's attractiveness should be based on your personal tastes were put in the corner while a discussion about prestige went on.</p>
<p>GO WAHOOS! W00T!</p>
<p>CommunistSmurf was just joking around guys...</p>
<p>
[quote]
I really don't like how college rankings and statistics factor into people's decisions.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I don't think there's anything wrong w/ presenting stats if used properly. (I agree about rankings. Some rankings are more problematic than others.) Stats help prospective students decide what school's right for them along with the "feel" of the school.</p>
<p>
[quote]
^ Not being Harvard does not suck...infact I would prefer UVA over Harvard undergrad anyday (unless Harvard offers me a full ride and UVA doesn't...but if they both cost the same and I got into both...Call me a Cavalier). I really don't like how college rankings and statistics factor into people's decisions. This whole topic's controversy was based around statistics and the people who said that a college's attractiveness should be based on your personal tastes were put in the corner while a discussion about prestige went on
[/quote]
</p>
<p>But a Harvard diploma basically guarantees employability in the top jobs in the world, and a shoe-in in many top graduate universities. It'd be crazy to choose any other school over Harvard.</p>
<p>
[quote]
and a shoe-in in many top graduate universities.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Nah, not if you show little to no research potential and have a poor application in general. 10% of the applicants to med schools from Harvard are rejected from every med school to which they apply. Many don't get their first choice or second or third of PhD program or professional program. I hope you're being sarcastic- the degree is only worth so much.</p>
<p>I used to think like that until I really thought about it and realized certain things.</p>
<p>Well you see, rather than choosing a school based on prestige, I want a school where I will be happy! I'm going to have to disagree with you about the shoe-in thing. Think about it, how many people who apply to Harvard actually are applying because it is a fit for them rather than for prestige? One can assume a portion(small or large) only care about prestige (as evidenced by this board. How many people have you see on "what are my chances?" that have said they fell in love with Harvard?). So now you have an extremely ambitious and intelligent group going to one school...of course they are bound to succeed! </p>
<p>I think you are forgetting about the people who succeed from UVA and Berkeley. My boss actually gave me some good stories of a person he hired from Harvard grad school who just couldn't cut it in the real world and another kid who aced his SATs, went to Duke, and failed because he got drunk.</p>
<p>It really is what you make of your education...not where you go. I rather be happy that go to a stop school. I've worked too hard to be miserable in college.</p>
<p>Word, yoshi9143, word.</p>
<p>Some US News statistics are objective but others are ridiculously subjective and mis-weighted. Fact is, William & Mary is the most selective public. Period. It has the highest SAT scores (1360 average), lowest out of state accept rate (22%) and highest commitment to academics. It is also the second oldest US college after Harvard and perhaps the greatest bargain in terms of tuition not to mention an 80% placement rate in medical schools. This school should really be in the top 10 of any survey but it doesn't have a multi-million marketing budget like Duke or Washington U.</p>
<p>UNC OOS is harder than WM dude</p>
<p>macsuile, you fail to provide any persuasive arguments supporting your claim (including many things unrelated to making it a selective public, such as med school admittance rate and age of campus) AND you post it in a location that doesn't make sense.</p>
<p>Perhaps it has the highest SAT score (evidence)? By how much (compared to the others)? What if it weights that factor more heavily than other schools? What about it's small size? Doesn't that make small acceptance rates less impressive? In addition, no acceptance rate means much without considering the pool from which the applicants are drawn (and I'm not saying W and M's is bad- it's quite good, you just act as if acceptance rate means something on it's own, which it doesn't). "Commitment to academics" sounds so meaningless and hard to justify. You shouldn't hijack this thread and instead start a new one in the proper location.</p>