<p>Okay, so I know that Berkeley is public, thus it doesn't have as much money as a lot of the elite privates, but how does it still mantain such world class faculty? I mean, when I visited MIT this past weekend I saw lots of funding, pristine labs, state-of-the-art equipment, the works. However, I know that like my biology professor is brilliant at Cal. he got his bs. from princeton, got and an MD Phd from Johns Hopkins, and hes a great teacher. And there are lots of such professors at Berkeley. I mean we just had a nobel winner, Smoot. </p>
<p>So, are these professors getting paid comparable salaries to elite privates? Are they getting comparable lab funding and equipment? Because i can bet you a lot of these professors could just as easily be at Stanford or MIT. What keeps them? I haven't been in the labs too much so I don't know if they are comparable to the ones I saw at MIT, or whether the funding is as good, or even whether some of the classes at Berkeley are as cool as the most advanced ones I saw in MIT. Are they? And if not, why does the faculty stay? Just curious really. I mean, because if the labs really are that great, then I want in on that action and get some research for myself! thanks</p>
<p>Most of the big name professors are getting federal and private grants. The granting agency doesn't really care where you work as long as you are getting institutional support and are getting results. People like these are highly desired by many institutions because of the dollars they bring to the institution, so they do try to pay them a salary that will keep them there. There are often intangibles in why a person chooses to stay at one place over another. They may like the weather in Berkeley better than Boston for example. Maybe they have family on the west coast. Maybe they find that Berkeley has more relaxed atmosphere than Stanford or MIT. Maybe they have a spouse who has a job that they really like and don't want to move. Maybe they got started at Berkeley and don't want to go through the hassle of moving a lab, grad students, etc. Maybe MIT or Stanford already has someone doing similar work so they are no openings at those schools. </p>
<p>Berkeley is a highly regarded research institution. Many of its scientific departments are considered in the top 5 in the country. Many researchers at lesser ranked schools would love to work there if they had the opportunity. It has as much going for it as either MIT or Stanford, so why not work there?</p>
<p>I don't think many academics have $$$ as the top thing in their lives. Plus many can make several times their salary doing some consulting so the college pay is just the base.</p>
<p>sure, your right barrons, money isn't probably a top concern, but im sure facilities and funding for your research is. so basically, the only way profs would stay is if they were well funded. i mean like i understand the whoel thing about a mulititude of factors such a weather and stuff, but the fact is there must be some hardlined reason below it all. I mena there are many schools with good weather, why Berkeley is the question. Why Berkeley? and the only thing i can think of is that the labs really are pretty well funded, and that the institution is able to pay them enough to stay.
it is the professors that make berkeley a great grad school, not the other way around. therefore, if the professors leave then it loses its luster. so if the professors make it great, then why are the profesors there, not because it is a good grad school because after all they are the ones that make it a great grad school. wherever they go, that is where the good grad schools are. so why did they choose berkeley if it cannot match MIT and Stanford as far as funding and facilities goes? The only way is if really does match the facilities at these top schools and the labs really are amazing and well funded.</p>
<p>Some places on campus are ridiculously nice, the ones off limits to students in general. I happened to have a tour when I was being interviewed for some research positions.</p>
<p>
[quote]
therefore, if the professors leave then it loses its luster. so if the professors make it great, then why are the profesors there, not because it is a good grad school because after all they are the ones that make it a great grad school. wherever they go, that is where the good grad schools are. so why did they choose berkeley if it cannot match MIT and Stanford as far as funding and facilities goes? The only way is if really does match the facilities at these top schools and the labs really are amazing and well funded.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I think you just answered your own question - the labs and facilities really are quite nice, certainly on par with the other top schools. </p>
<p>It all gets to something that I have said before numerous times - Berkeley is a quite nice place to do research and to pursue graduate studies. The resources are actually quite extensive and the lab facilities are state-of-the-art. The issue is that undergrads rarely get to partake of these resources. It is in the undergraduate experience that Berkeley is rather chintzy, because Berkeley is saving those resources for its graduate programs and its research. For example, comparing, say, the undergraduate chemistry labs and the labs that the chemistry profs and grad students use really is like comparing night and day.</p>
<p>
[quote]
or even whether some of the classes at Berkeley are as cool as the most advanced ones I saw in MIT. Are they?
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Some of the advanced classes, and in particular, the graduate-level courses really are as good as anything else in the world. For example, if you really want to learn the cutting-edge of Psychological Economics, it is difficult to find a class better than Matthew Rabin's Econ 219 class. If you really want to learn the cutting-edge of reaction catalysis (and are willing to work very hard), it's hard to do better than Iglesia's ChemE 244 class. These classes are very good classes.</p>