<p><em>clap clap clap</em> </p>
<p>nicely put</p>
<p>Sakky is amazing! Where does he come up with this? Wait a sec, let me try. Ok, for ug business Cal is #1, and I'm not sure they even have one but I'll put the farm at #2 and tech at #3. For engineering I'll say that Cal and Stafurd are basically tied, but just to make sakky happy I'll give stanfurd #1, Cal #2 and tech #3. Then for English Cal gets the #1 slot with the Furd following directly behind at #2, and back in the distance would be tech at #3. Ok, lets add those bad boy up, shall we? By my math Cal comes in with a 4, furd with a 5, and tech with 9 (ouch!). Ok, it settled then. No more talk.</p>
<p>The difference between Caltech and Berkeley is not even close! The best measure of a school is the intelligence of the student body. For example, if we compared the IQ scores of both Caltech's and Berkeley's student body, I think it's safe to say that Caltech's will be significantly higher. Does it matter if the students are geniuses in biology, chemistry, physics, mathematics, or engineering? Caltech is a very VERY small school with less than 200-300 students per class. They have more than their fair share of academic superstars in proportion to their class size. How can you ding them for not having a genius in literature or the classics? </p>
<p>Anyway, in terms of resources spent per student and the overall intelligence of Caltech's class, it's safe to say that Berkeley doesn't even compete.</p>
<p>Then stanfurd doesn't compare either. And as far as "dinging" them for not having a good english program, why wouldn't I? Just like I'd ding Cal for not having a med school or stanfurd for giving away As without having to work for them.</p>
<p>The intelligence of Stanford and Caltech's student bodies are roughly the same.</p>
<p>Honestly...</p>
<p>I agree with many of you. The scientific genius of a Caltech student probably exceeds the scientific genius of a Stanford or Berkeley student, but only generally and stereotypically. But as far as creativity in the humanities and arts? I'm not sure.</p>
<p>Have any of you actually visited Caltech? I have. Sure, I'll give you that their student body is amazingly intelligent. But social life? College experience? I didn't see much. Caltech has the highest student suicide rate in California, and is only beat by MIT and (gasp) Harvard, when the morbid competition goes nation-wide. This may not mean much, and I acknowledge how trivial this little bit of information is, but it's still a little discouraging.</p>
<p>I'm sorry, but I would rather go to a school that has some sort of reputation for being enjoyable. The students at Berkeley work hard, but they also know how to let loose and have a good time. I'll take my # 3 school (according to this thread) and enjoy my weekends, thank you. After all, it's not called the "college experience" for nothing.</p>
<p><3,</p>
<p>Izzie Bear</p>
<p>What is this symbol supposed to be: <3 </p>
<p>Is it some kind of bird with a really big butt?</p>
<p>A butt cone?</p>
<p>yes. a butt cone. haha..</p>
<p>it's a heart, turn your head. </p>
<p>LOVE (<3),</p>
<p>Izzie Bear</p>
<p>Gentlemenandscholar, you gotta be kidding me. </p>
<p>
[quote]
Ok, for ug business Cal is #1, and I'm not sure they even have one but I'll put the farm at #2 and tech at #3.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Come now, for UG business? You really want to treat that as a discrete category? You really think it's all that important that Berkeley has an UG business major and Stanford doesn't? You don't think that Stanford students are extremely successful in getting business jobs right after UG? </p>
<p>I'll put it to you this way. Stanford runs a Petroleum Engineering ug program, and Berkeley doesn't (they used to, but not anymore). In case you're thinking that PetE isn't a worthy engineering degree, let me point out that PetE students have the highest average starting salary of any engineering discipline, even higher than computer science, EE, or ChemE. So because Stanford has this major and Berkeley doesn't, should Berkeley be unduly punished for this? </p>
<p><a href="http://stats.bls.gov/oco/ocos037.htm%5B/url%5D">http://stats.bls.gov/oco/ocos037.htm</a></p>
<p><a href="http://stats.bls.gov/oco/ocos267.htm%5B/url%5D">http://stats.bls.gov/oco/ocos267.htm</a></p>
<p><a href="http://stats.bls.gov/oco/ocos029.htm%5B/url%5D">http://stats.bls.gov/oco/ocos029.htm</a></p>
<p><a href="http://stats.bls.gov/oco/ocos031.htm%5B/url%5D">http://stats.bls.gov/oco/ocos031.htm</a></p>
<p>I'll put it to you another way. The Haas MBA program has plenty of former Stanford undergrads. But if you can only learn business through an UG business program and Stanford doesn't have an UG business program, then how is that possible? Are you saying that Haas should expel all of these Stanford students because they obviously don't know anything about business, because they don't have business UG degrees? </p>
<p>
[quote]
For engineering I'll say that Cal and Stafurd are basically tied, but just to make sakky happy I'll give stanfurd #1, Cal #2 and tech #3.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Are you serious about that? You said it yourself before that the engineering students at Berkeley would probably prefer to be at Caltech. Why would they prefer that, if Cal is really a better engineering school than is Caltech? Are they dumb? </p>
<p>
[quote]
Ok, lets add those bad boy up, shall we? By my math Cal comes in with a 4, furd with a 5, and tech with 9 (ouch!).
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Yet by your own admission, you conceded yourself that 8 out of 10 people who are admitted to Stanford and Cal would choose Stanford. Yet according to your own model, Cal is better than Stanford. So what's up with that? So those 8 out of 10 people are obviously being stupid because they prefer to go to a school that is worse, is that what you're saying?</p>
<p>Come on, man, your model has to make sense in the real world. I could come up with a model that shows that San Jose State is better than Harvard, but would anybody really believe that? Your model has to have a sanity check. The fact of the matter is, at the very least, you know and I know that people tend to prefer to go to Stanford than Berkeley, so whatever model you make has to reflect that fact. </p>
<p>
[quote]
Caltech has the highest student suicide rate in California, and is only beat by MIT and (gasp) Harvard, when the morbid competition goes nation-wide. This may not mean much, and I acknowledge how trivial this little bit of information is, but it's still a little discouraging.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I think that Caltech had a high suicide rate in only one (bad) year, and when you consider the tiny size of the Caltech student body, having a rash of suicides in one year can throw the stats for that one year completely out of whack. In any case, I would like to see the data that shows that Caltech truly has a high suicide rate of any school over a long period of time. </p>
<p>What I would point to is the graduation rates of Caltech and Berkeley. The fact is, Caltech graduates a higher percentage of its students than does Berkeley, despite Caltech's reputation for legendary academic rigor. The fact of the matter is that you go to college not just because it's fun to go to college. Rather, you go to college to earn a degree. And the simple fact is, Caltech students earn degrees at a higher rate than do Berkeley students. This is especially telling when you consider the fact that Caltech really doesn't have any 'puff' majors where you can pass classes while doing very little work, but Berkeley does have plenty such majors. No matter what major you choose at Caltech, you're going to be working hard. However, if you go to Berkeley and decide you don't really want to work very hard, but still graduate, there are majors in which you can do that. Nevertheless, Caltech students graduate at a higher rate than do Berkeley students. Any way you look at it, Berkeley has a problem on its hands. Either Berkeley is admitting students who shouldn't be admitted. Or a high proportion of Berkeley students are unusually lazy and immature. Or Berkeley does not try to help its students to graduate. Or a lot of Berkeley students simply don't like it and decide to transfer to some other school (and are thus counted as people who came to Berkeley but never graduated). Any way you cut it, it's not good for Berkeley.</p>
<p>So if you want to talk about suicide rates, then I think it's only fair that we also talk about graduation rates.</p>
<p>
[quote]
I'm sorry, but I would rather go to a school that has some sort of reputation for being enjoyable
[/quote]
</p>
<p>But is Berkeley really all that enjoyable? Is it? So why does Princeton Review give only 3 stars to Berkeley for its quality of life? Granted, it's better than Caltech's score, but not as good as Stanford's score (5 stars).</p>
<p>Sakky,</p>
<p>Why do I get the feeling that you are trying to tear down people's excitment about college, paticularly Berkeley? Because honestly, what else are you trying to do? I post responses, agreeing with many of your educated and valuable comments, but you have to find some way to spit back at me. You do it strategically, weaving them with seldom comments about the semi-positives of Berkeley, but it's never really a 100% effort. I do find your posts interesting, and I believe that you post some great information, but I have never seen you post a single post about Berkeley that's generally encouraging.</p>
<p>Why don't you just let the rest of us experience Berkeley for ourselves? Personally, I have no idea what I'll like and dislike about Berkeley, but I know I'll soon experience both the great and the not-so-great. I do know that I have a positive outlook on my upcoming years in college. I picked Berkeley from a slew of other universities for a reason, and hopefully that reason will see me through. As far as Berkeley having a reputation for being fun, perhaps you don't agree, and that's fine. But I know that for people that seek out the opportunity and are up for it, Berkeley is a blast. I have spent a good amount of time on campus, as I live in the Bay Area and have several friends at Cal, and the weekends are excellent.</p>
<p>Oh, and "puff" majors? I assume you are referring to my own major, which is english. Hm...I guess I'm a puff-a-lump. Ah Well.</p>
<p><3,</p>
<p>Izzie Bear</p>
<p>Well, I think it is my responsibility to actually express my honest opinions about Berkeley, and whether they happen to inspire or depress people is not my concern. Like I said before, I'm not here to make posts that are generally encouraging. It's not my job to be a cheerleader. It's not my job to only say positive things and nothing else. I'm here to give honest opinions. You want honest opinions about Berkeley, well, here I am giving them. Are you saying that you don't really want to hear the truth, that you don't really want to hear honest opinions about Berkeley? If that is the case, then just say so. </p>
<p>And I don't think I'm stopping anybody from experiencing Berkeley for yourselves. Like I said before, if you don't like what I have to say, you don't have to read it. I don't have a gun to anybody's heads. I will post what I honestly think, and if you don't like what I have to say, fair enough, don't read it. </p>
<p>I never said that English was a 'puff' major. I will let other people comment on the 'puff' majors at Berkeley.</p>
<p>The point is, what you say about Berkeley isn't the truth about Berkeley. It's your opinion, nothing less and nothing more. I think you just want to label me spineless and immature, and not able to deal with your posts.</p>
<p>When you respond to what I say, I'm probably going to read it, even if it's just out of general curiosity. </p>
<p>You obviously didn't like your experience at Berkeley. But honestly, you come off too strong. Your responses are long and tedious. You aim at newly admitted Cal students who probably spent a lot of time trying to get into the university. We're excited, so stop trying to be a rain cloud on this e-parade.</p>
<p>You take these threads too seriously. You act as if it's your job to report the negatives that exist at Cal. You said it was your responsibility to respond, but it really isn't. You could just as easily shrug it off and just be content with the fact that everyone views Berkeley differently. It's really a matter of opinion, and frankly, yours is too condescending.</p>
<p>As far as 'puff majors' go, how about we DON'T comment about that one. Every major is a great major. Study what you want to study, or else your college life will be miserable. If we start pointing people out and putting down major choices, this will be a violation of the CC terms of service and someone will get reported for being downright disrespectful. Watch what you're encouraging.</p>
<p>Sakky, those ranking aren't mine, they belong to the biblical USNews UG rankings. For business Cal is #3, for engineering Cal is number three and stanfurd is number two, but they are seperated by .1, which isn't much but is why I gave stanfurd #1 in that topic. As for if its important to have an UG business department, honestly I don't think so, but thats only because I'm not interested in that. But, then again, I don't care about engineering either. So who's to decide what departments should be valued? You? Because thats what you seem to be saying. And you say, "Yet by your own admission, you conceded yourself that 8 out of 10 people who are admitted to Stanford and Cal would choose Stanford. Yet according to your own model, Cal is better than Stanford. So what's up with that? So those 8 out of 10 people are obviously being stupid because they prefer to go to a school that is worse, is that what you're saying?" I'm not saying that Cal is better than stanfurd. If you haven't figured it out yet, I'm mocking your lame ranking method. I can't tell you if Stanfurd is better than Cal or the other way around because I've only attended Cal. I've said before that I would bet that 8 out of 10 students would pick stanfurd over Cal and I stick by that. Stanfurd has more prestige and is PERCEIVED to be the better school. Maybe it is, maybe it isn't. I don't know that, you don't know that , and a bunch of highschoolers that have yet to go to either school don't know that. Its an individual thing. For example, take your friend that flunked out of Berkeley. I don't think that you'd claim UC Santa Barbara is a better school then Berkeley, but your friend probably wouldn't have flunked out of UCSB, so for him SB is the better school.</p>
<p>I agree that what I say about Berkeley isn't the whole truth. But neither is anything that anybody else posts. On the other hand, I'd like to think that I try to back up what I say with data when I can and with anecdotes when I must, something that many others don't bother to do. </p>
<p>And I said it before, these are simple posts on a discussion board. If you can't handle this, then how are you going to be prepared to handle Berkeley when it really gets rough? Berkeley isn't just fun and games, you know. This is real life here. There are going to be quite serious and discouraging things that will happen to you. </p>
<p>I don't think my posts are condescending, nor do I intentionally make them that way, but even if they are, well, so what? I believe that a basic tenet of a discussion board is to get a wide variety of opinions, including opinions which some people may not like or may not agree with. </p>
<p>I don't think I'm discouraging any violation of terms of service by talking about puff majors. There are people on CC who go to Berkeley who themselves admit that their own majors are puff. if you want, I can produce these posts. When they are admitting puffness within their own major, I don't think anybody can be accused of violating any terms of service.</p>
<p>Um, I guess you're speaking to the greater population on these boards, because I think you know that I'm already a student at Cal, so you don't need to fret over me handling Berkeley. As for you producing the posts where people say they take fluff majors, please do produce them. I've always felt that if you are going to imply that a major is easy or "fluff" as you like to say, then you should at least have the courage to say what those majors are and let people defend them (or condemn them).</p>
<p>You weren't violating any terms of service, and I didn't imply that. I merely stated that if people started saying "Well, ______ is a puff major, people who major in that are lazy students who can't make it in the real departments", this would cross the line and could be considered very disrespectful. </p>
<p>Hm. I guess just because I am tired of your recyled opinion, I suppose I won't be able to handle Berkeley. What an excellent concept, bravo wise one. How did I know you would say something like that? Believe it or not, I'm very ready for the real world and already live in it. I'm not fresh out of high school, but I'm sure by your obvious experience and time spent here on CC, you probably gathered enough details about my academic history.</p>
<p>I can't win with you, and I'm not going to try to. I think you are bitter about your experience at Berkeley and you try to express this by concealing your true feelings by layers of pointless statistics. </p>
<p>You're right, college isn't just about fun and games. It's about hard work, sweat, and determination. But you know what? I expect to make the best of my time in college. I'm young, ridiculously gorgeous, and vibrant. Perhaps this is the difference between you and me. I'm not going to go to Cal, avoid the welcome week activites, skip the bonding time with roomates, and erase the excitement of my first class, just to stress about US News and message boards. And honestly, who is? Raise your hands because I would like to know. </p>
<p>I just hope that by the time I get my degree from Berkeley, I have long forgotten about CC.</p>
<p>Sorry sakky, I don't mean to be insulting, but I'm sure you're not insulted. I've just had enough of your subliminal messages.</p>
<p><3,</p>
<p>Izzie Bear</p>
<p>Sorry to say it, Izzie, but if you're really ready for the real world, then you should be able to take all my comments in stride. After all, have I really said anything that's so terrible and so disheartening? As you can tell, I'm not like those other Berkeley-bashers on CC who really go around just rudely slamming the school. You know who I'm talking about. </p>
<p>You also talk about layers of pointless statistics? So you would feel better if I just say what I have to say without backing them up with data? Would that really make you feel any better? Be honest. It's not that I use stats in my posts. It's the fact that I post at all that bothers you. In fact, you'd probably be even MORE incensed if I posted without the stats, right? Again, be honest. </p>
<p>
[quote]
I'm not going to go to Cal, avoid the welcome week activites, skip the bonding time with roomates, and erase the excitement of my first class, just to stress about US News and message boards. And honestly, who is? Raise your hands because I would like to know.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>And am I forcing you to stress about USNews or message boards? I say what I have to say and whether you choose to stress about it or even read it is up to you. It's like somebody who reads the newspaper and gets all riled up. Well, if the paper really riles you up, then maybe you shouldn't be reading the paper. </p>
<p>However, I will continue to maintain my position. The Berkeley undergraduate program, while pretty good, has flaws. I don't think it does anybody any good to pretend this is not the case. </p>
<p>Now, to gentlemenandScholar, you asked, so here are a few.</p>
<p>"But as a general rule? I'll admit it, American Studies is pretty fluff if you don't take the right classes."</p>
<p>"I'm a graduating legal studies major from Cal,...Like someone said before, the legal studies major by itself is pretty much a joke. It's not academically rigorous and everyone knows that, including the law school adcomms. The classes are ridiculously easy. "</p>
<p>Note, gentlemenandscholar, don't blame me for the quotes. I'm not the one who said it. If you don't like those quotes, you should take it up with the people who actually wrote them. However, you should bear in mind that the people who said that those majors are fluff are themselves in the major. If anybody would know that these majors are fluff, I would think it would be the people who are actually in the major.</p>
<p>Sakky, if someone is in a major and says that its a fluff major I won't argue with them (unless its also my major). My problem with your "you all know what the fluff majors are," is that you often slyly make it seem as though any non-tech majors could be construed as "fluff," which you have the right to believe and say on these boards, but by only hinting at it you avoid having to defend it because you can always claim that you never out right said the major was fluff.</p>
<p>Did I say that all non-tech majors are fluff? Please point to the quote where I said that. </p>
<p>What I do believe is that, in general, the majors in the physical sciences and engineering tend to be more difficult than the humanities and the social sciences. And it is not just me saying it. Consider the words of Professor Jasper Rine, who investigated this as part of the Berkeley Committee on Teaching. </p>
<p>"Rine asked Associate Registrar Walter Wong to assemble some data looking at upper division and lower division grading in the physical sciences, biological sciences, social sciences, humanities and engineering, so that he could distinguish trends from anecdotal exceptions. The results were clear. "The physical sciences and engineering had rigorous grading standards roughly in line with the recommendations from 1976," stated Rine, "while the humanities and social sciences in many classes had all but given up on grades below a B, and in many courses below an A-, "</p>
<p>If you dispute that, maybe you'd like to contact him and tell him that he's wrong.</p>
<p>First, Jasper Rine is not a source that I would ever trust (considering his current circumstances). Second, did you not read my post? I freely admit that you have never outright said that they are fluff majors, thus is would have to go through 50,000 of your words and pick out the tone shifts and subtle jabs to prove anything, which I really don't want to do.</p>