<p>may I remind you all that UC Berkeley’s OOS percentage is now 23% for the incoming freshman class:</p>
<p><a href=“http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/1065250518-post1.html[/url]”>http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/1065250518-post1.html</a></p>
<p>hi hawkette, I see that you are up to your old tricks</p>
<p>be a doll, will you, and please tell us what single college or university is a factor for the vast majority of Americans.</p>
<p>thanks</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Don’t expect an answer JA. She’ll just change the subject.</p>
<p>JohnAdams12,
Please allow me to reply for hawkette.
No, Berkeley is not a factor of undergraduate education nationwide; however I believe it is in California or west coast.
It is just a good school like many public flagship universities, regionally wise. If you live in the east coast, you will know few people care Berkeley.
I have lived in Massachusetts for more than 15 years, from many of the high schools and friends around me (I am an Asian), there are only a very few application at Berkeley each year and havent heard any enrollment.
It is simple Berkeley is not even close to be a best value school for OOS students.</p>
<p>I’m from the Midwest and I have known 0 people who have even applied to Berkeley in my four years of High School.</p>
<p>The truth is that the most prestigious State schools according to people who live in Minnesota and Wisconsin are the University of Minnesota and the University of Wisconsin (sort of joint because they’re pretty much instate for both states). The most prestigious state school to people in Michigan is Michigan. The most prestigious state school to people in Iowa is Iowa. That tends to be how the Midwest goes. While the West Coast sees California schools as fantastic, and the East Coast tends to lean on Privates due to a comparative lack of nice Publics, the Midwestern states are all about their state schools.</p>
<p>How about (in alphabetical order):</p>
<p>top in terms of Undergraduate/selectivity: </p>
<p>Berkeley
Georgia Tech
Michigan
UCLA
UNC
UVA
William & Mary
possibilities for #8 - Illinois/Texas/Washington/Wisconsin</p>
<p>Graduate/research/faculty quality</p>
<p>Berkeley
Illinois
Michigan
UCLA
UCSD
Texas
Washington
Wisconsin
immediately below these: Florida/Georgia Tech/Minnesota/Ohio State/Penn State/Pitt/UNC/UVA</p>
<p>(not including specialty/med school-only powerhouses like UCSF and Texas-Southwestern)</p>
<p>^ Your ranking looks very engineering-focused. If you include the social sciences and professional programs, Michigan > Illinois and Georgia Tech.</p>
<p>^ I didn’t mean for it to be a ranking… just the top for each group listed alphabetically</p>
<p>Oh, I see your point now! It’s almost bedtime over here. :)</p>
<p>golacs, ha!</p>
<p>you did NOT answer my question, which was this specifically:</p>
<p>“be a doll, will you, and please tell us what single college or university is a factor for the vast majority of Americans.”</p>
<p>thank you for the info on UC Berkeley, however - good to know</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Re: Post #126…
OK, so you’ve designated what are probably the top public universities. I think there would be pretty good consensus on this (though not necessarily on their rank order). Now, in line with the topic of this thread, take it the next step: do you think there is validity to the notion of “public ivy”, i.e., a public university where a top/honors student can obtain an education as good as, or possibly even better than, he/she might get at an elite private university across a wide range of disciplines? Why or why not? (See Post #82 for my hypothetical examples of situations that potentially do lend support to the notion of “public ivy”).</p>
<p>hawkette, just so you would know. I am not Chinese. I am Italian. My wife is not Chinese either. She’s Filipina. </p>
<p>There are many more Koreans at Berkeley than there are Chinese. And the biggest block of international students at Berkeley is Canadians. At Haas, the French accounted the biggest representation in the international student body of the said college. </p>
<p>Berkeley is not prestigious amongst the Chinese people alone. Berkeley is a famous name world-wide. It has a resounding name in the whole of Europe especially in France, Germany, Italy, the UK, Greece or Norway. In fact, the crown Prince of Norway is a die-hard Berkeley alumnus and a number of royalties have attended Berkeley. I am willing to wager that in Europe the Berkeley name would make it in the top 10 best universities in the world if there would be such a survey. Some Ivy League schools wouldn’t even make it in the top 10. Now, whether that’s due in part (or large part) to Berkeley’s superb postgrad education is not the issue of this debate. The simple point is Berkeley is prestigious and most people all over the world would not care whether it’s undergrad or postgrad.</p>
<p>
</a></p>
<p>I’m fully aware about that. Are you reminded as well that the stats of this year’s accepted students are better than of last year’s? So what’s your point?</p>
<p>MSauce & golacs:</p>
<p>Okay; so no one from your State has applied to Berkeley. Granted what you both said is true, is Berkeley not a prestigious school then?</p>
<p>zapfino
</p>
<p>Yes there is. For me, three groups would best determine the validity of top academic quality/education. These are (in order): 1. the academic people 2. The top employers, and 3. The top students</p>
<p>And, basing on feedbacks from these 3 groups, I would say that there are a handful of publics that are as good as if not slightly better than some of the top privates, and these are: Berkeley, Michigan, UVa and to some extent, UCLA, William and Mary, UNC, Texas-Austin, Georgia Tech, and to a lesser extent, UCSD, UCSB, UC Irivne, UC Davis, Penn State, UIUC, UF and UIUC.</p>
<p>^^^^You totally forgot Wisconsin, which should certainly be up there with at least that second grouping of schools.</p>
<p>RML</p>
<p>The reason why people are hammering on Berkeley haveing very few OOS students is because of the hidden assumption that- top quality student=good school. I agree with this because: </p>
<p>Academics is really the same in most schools- what determines how great the education you receive depends on your chances of being challenged in a particular school. I had a professor who taught math at one of the top publics (Will not name names) before coming to my undergrad and she complained that she could not set exams to a high standard because of the student body. Learning is more important than prestige IMO. Regardless of graduate academic prestige- what you are taught in undergrad and the depth of academics depends on the quality of the student body. I am sure the Cambridge method of education would not be well spent on students at lower schools who lower ability. Professors adjust their teaching styles to suit a particular group.</p>
<p>So in the US you can see why people separate Undergrad from Graduate. Graduate school is based on a lot of independent work while undergraduate depends on the quality of instruction you receive and how you are challenged. No professor would be interested in challenging a mediocre student body.</p>
<p>Also in terms of Cambridge- Cambridge is prestigious for many reasons but one of them is its strong student body. It attracts the best students in the UK and the best students in former British colonies. That’s where its prestige is strongest. Student body is a big reason for how a school is perceived. </p>
<p>Go down south to Mississippi and you will find out that people do not make much difference between Ole Miss and harvard. You are not going to get the same backside worshiping of the Ivy league that you get in the Northeast.</p>
<p>
so, you’re saying that only top students come from OOS? Might I remind you of a few facts:
<p>No- just that you are likely to get more top students from out of state. Berkeley might get the top students in California- I dont know. I feel if you widen your net a little you might have a larger and more diverse student pool academically</p>