Berkeley is not more prestigious than Brown or Dartmouth. Brown is the most prestigious Ivy behind HYP and Dartmouth is close behind it. The former is known for manufacturing elite lawyers and the latter is known for producing elite investment bankers. Most of their students attend elite prep schools in the Northeast Corridor of the US, the most elite socioeconomic region in the United States.
<a href=“http://www.nber.org/papers/w10803.pdf[/url]”>http://www.nber.org/papers/w10803.pdf</a>
Brown: 7
Dartmouth: 10
Berkeley: 23</p>
<p>Berkeley is a state school which serves the citizens of a bankrupt state and is best known for its far-leftist movements in the 1970s/80s…there’s nothing prestigious about that. Academic quality and prestige aren’t as closely related as you think RML and in fact I believe the term “academic prestige” is an oxymoron. Prestige is a more a function of social stature than academic quality.</p>
<p>When I think of prestige, I think of The Four Seasons, Patek Philippe, Brooks Brothers, Oliver Stone, etc., not Nobel Laureates and approval of the Asian population. These qualities are more correlated with Brown and Dartmouth than with Berkeley.</p>
<p>Also, if an institution is to be prestigious, then it must also be very selective to get into since exclusivity is a key element of having an “elite” reputation, which is something by definition Berkeley doesn’t have since it is a STATE SCHOOL that accepts transfers from community colleges and has much higher acceptance rates overall.</p>
<p>lesdiablesbleus, Patek Philippe, Four Seasons, Oliver Brooks etc… are prestigious because of their quality not because of their exclusivity. Patek Philip builds some of the best watches in the world, Four Seasons runs some of the best properties in the world and Brooks Brothers fabricate some of the best men’s shirts in the world. It is their quality that made them prestigious, not exclusivity. Of course, people always desire quality and prestige and as such, in many instances, there is an element of exclusivity attached to prestige, but that is not always the case. Virtually anybody can own a Brooks Brothers shirt or spend a night at a Four Seasons hotel. At $20,000-$60,000 a pop, Patek Philippe is a little harder to afford. </p>
<p>As far as universities go, all universities that are excellent/elite are going to be prestigious, and that includes Cal. Cal’s prestige is not limited merely to naubel laureates and Asians. Virtually anybody who is knowledgeable about universities will respect Berkeley. Ask any senior executive at any major company or any great thinker/intellectual of our time and she/he will tell you that Cal is an excellent university. </p>
<p>Also, I am not sure how revealed preferences can be used as a proxy for prestige. Is Caltech truly more prestigious than MIT and Princeton? Are UVa and Rice truly more prestigious than Chicago and Johns Hopkins? Are Notre Dame and Swarthmore trulymore prestigious than Duke? Are Wake, Miami and Maryland truly more prestigious than WUSTL? The revealed preferences ranking is interesting to be certain, but it is a mere reflection of student behavior and preference and is not an accurate depiction of prestige among the educated and influential masses. Those same students generally cannot tell you the difference between Marriot and Ritz, between Swatch and Breguet or between Chilis and Alinea. </p>
<p>And to label Cal as a mere “public” university would be tantamount to labeling Tiger Woods as merely an “African American” golfer. Yes,the vast majority of elite universities are private, just as the vast majority of top golfers are caucasian, but there are exceptions, and Cal is one such exception that transcends labeling…as are Tiger Woods, Michigan and UNC.</p>
<p>thebigcheese, I take it you come from CA. For OOS applicants and international students, Cal’s admit stats are scary (15% acceptance rate with a mean SAT score over 1450/2200).</p>
<p>I guess it depends on context. International prestige is very different from national prestige. As an international, I’m only going to talk about international prestige from where I am from. </p>
<p>Nobody knows Brown and Dartmouth. But people know Berkeley. So Berkeley is more prestigious, I guess. But I think prestige varies a lot not just from country to country outside the US, but also state to state within the US. </p>
<p>Also, I always thought Columbia was more prestigious than Brown, but that was just my perception. I could be entirely wrong. (To show how unbiased I am, I applied to Brown but not Columbia)</p>
<p>Therefore, as a whole, Michigan is superior to UNC in terms of academic prestige and brand name recognition. For undergrad, they’re pretty even. (Some would even say UNC is better.) But UNC’s lack of focus on their professional and postgrad schools allowed Michigan to pull away from the prestige race overall. 8.12 for Michigan and 6.42 for UNC. That looks substantial to me.</p>
<p>RML, no one in real life parses at this level. Your wife liked Berkeley? Great! Why isn’t that the most important thing, not what others think?</p>
<p>BTW, Asian perceptions of US schools are based on familiarity/awareness, which is being translated to prestige. “if I’ve heard of it, it’s got to be good. If I haven’t heard of it, it can’t be any good.”. It’s a fact-free assessment, and “being prestigious among Asians” means nothing. So are Hello Kitty and Louis Vuitton, but I don’t drape myself in them to impress others.</p>
<p>At the undergraduate level, Berkeley is a complete mess due to budget cuts, overenrollment, lack of access and availability of classes, etc. It is not very prestigious even to many California residents. But do you really want to use the Revealed Preference ranking to prove your point?</p>
<p>According to RP, les Duke diables bleus @ 19 are closer to the Cal Golden Bears @ 23 than either the Brown Bears @ 7 or the Dartmouth Big Green @ 10.</p>
<p>This is where you analogy breaks down. Brown and Dartmouth are more prestigious than Berkeley exactly because of “exclusivity.” It is much harder to get into Brown or Dartmouth than Berkeley.</p>
<p>If it were merely a matter of “quality” of academic programs (not student body), then it is clear that Berkeley beats both Brown and Dartmouth. But we don’t determine the prestige of undergraduate institutions only by academics and departmental rankings.</p>
<p>I think one thing that makes this conversation so difficult (and so nutty) is trying to compare apples to oranges.
You see, in the United States, when people talk about how prestigious a college is, they are primarily talking about how prestigious it is for undergraduate education. We don’t really think about the prestige of the institution overall. Thus, for example, if we say, “he went to Harvard,” we mean that he went there as an undergrad.
It may be that in Asia or elsewhere, the reputation of the institution as a whole is more significant.
Certainly, if you were to ask Americans to name the most prestigious public universities, they’d probably think of Berkeley, U of Va., and Michigan first. Maybe Wisconsin. UNC would be close, as would several others. But it would be wacky to choose any of these over the others on the basis of “prestige,” at least for undergrad.</p>
<p>For those too lazy to read this entire thread, let me re-cap the highlights:</p>
<p>Most enigmatic comment: “I believe that the prior school is more preferable.” </p>
<p>Most unusual fashion sense: “When I think of prestige, I think of … Patek Philippe, Brooks Brothers, Oliver Stone.” I am particularly fond of Stone’s JFK Collection, which comes pre-splattered with blood.</p>
<p>Proof that Harry Potter starlets at Brown are a better indicator of quality than nobel prize winners at Columbia: “Brown is the most prestigious Ivy behind HYP…” </p>
<p>And when someone says he’s going to McDonald’s, he means he’s getting a #3 Value Meal with extra mayo and a Diet Sprite: Thus, for example, if we say, “he went to Harvard,” we mean that he went there as an undergrad.</p>
<p>Consice and to the piont: “Over here, berkeley is ragerded as a safety for rich kids.”</p>
<p>I’d list more, but I gotta get down to the House of Watch Bands to get a new battery for my Timex.</p>
<p>To all those who’re saying that school prestige is largely meant for undergrad education, let me ask you these:</p>
<p>Is Brawn really more prestigious than Columbia?</p>
<p>Is Wilyams more prestigious than UPenn?</p>
<p>Is Harvey Mad more prestigious than Caltech?</p>
<p>Is Pomono more prestigious than Stanford?</p>
<p>Is Mc Cheena more prestigious than Berkeley?</p>
<p>Sorry that I can’t spell the LACs correctly. I’m just a poor Italian guy and I haven’t really heard of those LACs despite their excellent undergrad education.</p>
<p>“This is where you analogy breaks down. Brown and Dartmouth are more prestigious than Berkeley exactly because of “exclusivity.” It is much harder to get into Brown or Dartmouth than Berkeley.”</p>
<p>My analogy is spot on and Cal is actually more exclusive than Brown and Dartmouth for OOS applicants. And although some people may associate selectivity with prestige, just as many do not. </p>
<p>"If it were merely a matter of “quality” of academic programs (not student body), then it is clear that Berkeley beats both Brown and Dartmouth. But we don’t determine the prestige of undergraduate institutions only by academics and departmental rankings. "</p>
<p>Who’s “we”? I personally determine prestige of undergraduate institutions almost entirely by academic and departmental rankings. And I am not alone. Virtually everybody I know have a similar definition of quality and prestige. Sure, quality of facilities, resources, quality of student body play a role, but how many Cal alumni do you know who would not have cut it at Brown or Dartmouth? My guess is not many.</p>