<p>bayboi10, #3:</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Sounds like the people you run into think Stanford is ranked above Harvard, Yale. </p>
<p>It’s a topsy-turvy world… ; )</p>
<p>^^ya, the Cal = HYS is really only in the minds of some Cal grads. the undergrad programs are not comparable. No one at HYS or the “general public” thinks that.</p>
<p>And go to Boston or New York people have heard of Cal and UCLA and that’s about it. The guys and gals on wall street think of Cal as we in California think of Brown, a good school for liberal stoner kids:) But not a serious academic 1st tier place</p>
<p>
But UCSB is a good school! UCSB has arguably the strongest academics amongst its party school peers. UCSB is the highest ranked USNWR university from Princeton Review’s 2010 - 2011 top 10 party schools. </p>
<p>That’s what makes the university so attractive. It’s a great place to let loose while you’re young but you have a future when you’re older as well.</p>
<p>
UCSB sports the College of Creative Studies, the only of its kind in the entire United States. OOS students frequently inquire about the program.</p>
<p>Davis also happens to be a really, really regional university. As many people point out, its the university brimming with Berkeley rejects. Not only is it not well known nationally, its not even that well known in all of California. Less than 3 students from my SoCal class of ~2000 chose to attend Davis. Some 40+ students opted for Irvine.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>that doesn’t mean much. so what if you are on top of other party schools? is that exactly supposed to alleviate being a party school? of course, only if you assume being a party school is a bad thing which you hopefully should. in case you are dubious: colleges are educational institutions by nature and not a shelter from supervision to party, drink, and have sex.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>so what? many universities sport unique majors, even davis. also, you misunderstood my comment. i meant that the department exceeds academically not that it simply exists. if that were the case, many universities would make up majors to claim academic excellence.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>before you or any other person in this thread butchers the term “regional university” any further:</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>davis is not a regional university.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>for your first clause, this thread in itself seems to explain why that is.</p>
<p>for the rest: in case you’ve forgotten, california is a big state. there is a reason why people use the terms “norcal” and “socal” to define the megaregions of california. it would make sense that socal students would know more about socal universities than norcal universities. it is no wonder socal students (where you are) opted to go to irvine (socal) rather than davis (norcal).</p>
<p>anyways, i think you misunderstood my earlier post. i’m not saying ucsb is a bad school, but you can see why it is so inconsistent that there is even a point that student atmosphere overcomes academics in being the basis of national prestige in educational institutions. also, i know that party schools do take initiative in reducing their “party” reputation, which is good.</p>
<p>
I think you’re confused. </p>
<p>What UCSB and Davis have is not “prestige”. Neither schools are prestigious in any way. Few will say, “You went to Davis? That’s a good school!” What these universities have is the precursor to “prestige”, “reputability”. </p>
<p>The OP asked for the “perception” of OOS students or how they “view” the UCs. Posters on this thread are talking about which schools OOS have “heard” of. Perception =/= prestige. Unless prospective students know about a university, there is no foundation for any form of “prestige” since “prestige” is built entirely upon preconceptions of the subject. </p>
<p>Being a party school is a very reasonable basis for “reputability”. “Reputability” is simply the acknowledgement of existence, regardless if its for something positive or negative. Being vocal, rowdy, loud, or violent are all basis for “reputability”. VirginiaTech, for example, became very reputable after the VirginiaTech massacre. In contrast, there is nothing particular excitable about any of UC Davis’ specialized top tier academic programs.</p>
<p>Also, for every student that places a priority on “partying”, there are dozens more that places a priority on “academics”. The problem is that there simply is nothing about Davis to distinguish it from a similarly ranked Eastern peer, such as PennState. The atmosphere at UCSB is one-of-a-kind.</p>
<p>In a small town in the UK called, Cambridge, Berkeley is viewed very highly and is seen comparable to Harvard, Stanford, MIT and Caltech, and is superior to Yale and Princeton. Most people there don’t make a distinction whether it’s Irvine, Davis, SB, LA, SD, SC or Merced. As long as it is a UC, then it must be a world-class academic institution.</p>
<p>As someone who has studied at Cambridge, I’d have to respectfully disagree with the above.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>two sentences, whatever…</p>
<p>In a very sad way, I’d have probably have to agree.</p>
<p>We all read the stories of every one of the 32 who were killed, and we not only were touched by their loss, but that every one of them was highly accomplished and smart and had so much going for them.</p>
<p>I had always known of Va Tech because of football, but by reading these students stories I realized that by random chance this gunman wiped out 32 students who were going to make a huge difference.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I disagree…</p>
<p>I’m sure the vet school draws a good amount of students to the undergrad colleges at UCD who aspire to be vets.</p>
<p>Winemaking program? Undoubtedly more of an esoteric science in academia, with less draw, but the primary name that pops up when the subject comes up. So for a select few, UCD, enology? at the school is Harvard, the Yale, the best.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>i can see your spine of the argument behind the definition of “reputation”, but i still stand by my argument. in english, reputation is not always neutral in esteem; sometimes it can be positive although never negative.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>in a general sense, UCSB’s atmosphere is in no way a “one-of-a-kind”. while universities and colleges are mainly educational, one cannot ignore that every student in every university has some priority in life for partying and academics. </p>
<p>again, i’m not saying ucsb is a bad school. there are still many students that are still involved in academics.</p>
<p>ucsb just happens to have an atmosphere where partying is far too prevalent.</p>
<p>@rml, read the original post next time</p>
<p>You do realize it’s possible to have a great education and partake in the active social atmosphere at the school, right? That’s the reason why UCSB is so popular. The faculty is top notch (5 Nobel prize winners, 29 NAS, 27 NAE, 23 AAAS members, etc) and the quality of students is in line with the mid-tier UCs, and Isla Vista definitely is one-of-a-kind! It’s not surprising that UCSB has the highest alumni giving rate in the entire UC system.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>???
right, as i more or less said in my 2nd portion in my previous post.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>funny how you perceive the ubiquity of partying in a school as a good thing.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>keywords: “in a general sense”</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>i’m not surprised either. students who party more than other students tend to be more happy but does this happiness lead to success? debatable.</p>
<p>My point was that in my personal experience, the party atmosphere was not that prevalent to the point of being significantly detrimental to academic achievement of students there. I don’t consider partying “good” or “bad”, it’s a choice that some people enjoy and some don’t.</p>
<p>These descriptions accurately apply to my part of the US:
</p>
<p>As for people within California equating Berkeley with Harvard, I wouldn’t doubt it in the slightest. UNC is virtually on par with Harvard, Yale, and Princeton in NC.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Does success lead to happiness?</p>
<p>If you had to pick one without knowing that answer, which would you pick?</p>
<p>
As a Southern California resident my entire life, I can rest assure you that Berkeley is NOT equatable to HYSPM even in California (at least not in SoCal). A Berkeley student is NOT considered impressive. The university matriculates thousands and thousands of students and a Berkeley (or any other UC) alumni is a dime a dozen. Even comparing Berkeley to Brown as the previous poster did was being very, very generous.</p>
<p>This Berkeley = HYPSM phenomenon is very specific to CollegeConfidential. -.-</p>
<p>^True. Sorry, but it is. Its for students who couldn’t get into the Ivy Leagues save HYPSM. Not even Columbia, Penn, Duke, UChicago, or Brown. People who have gotten into them may have chosen not to go because of location out of CA or costs. </p>
<p>I’ve lived in Norcal and I attended The Harker school, which is one of the prestigious high schools in the region. I know exactly what I’m talking about… It’s amazing how CC people who probably don’t even live in CA still view Berkeley with its 1930 reputation.</p>
<p>
That is so false. We equate Berkeley with smoking pot.</p>
<p>
I agree. The Berkeley=HYPSM exists only to the minds of international students. And most CC members are saying that that is due to Berkeley’s superior postgraduate programs.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>same here. Berkeley people seem really chill. But they dont give the aura of intellectual depth that you see in Ivy league students. Then I come to CC and I hear how great Cal is.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>So, you think most people think Cornell, Brown, Dartmouth or UPenn students are more “intellectual” than those Berkeley students? YOU’VE GOT TO BE KIDDING ME!</p>
<p>The ones I have met. Berkeley is huge, they get lots of students. Obviously I have not met all of them. I dont believe Berkeley is in the same class as Cornell, Penn or Brown. I would not lie, I base this on the students and alums I have met. Apologies but its a personal opinion albeit ignorant or overgeneralized from an opposite perspective. </p>
<p>Now berkeley graduate school on the other hand- the smartest people I encountered went ahead to attend berkeley for graduate school. Though apparently its less selective than Stanford because it takes more people. Still its graduate school is in a class of its own. Its undergraduate is top class but not the hype its given on CC. Except we are talking of another type of Berkeley.</p>