Which do you think is better between Rice and CAL-Berkeley?

College Search & Selection
21

<p>"Xiggi- please stop using so much hyperbole."</p>

<p>Yep, yep, the day you'll start dropping the obvious and intentional exaggeration of Berkeley's greatness in about every post that seeks an opinion about different programs. Berkeley is a great school, but is is far from being among the best in EVERY department, and especially its undergraduate division which rides on the coattails and reputation of the graduate programs. It may be hard for the Berkeley pompom crowd to understand that students who have a choice of schools see Berkeley through very different eyes, including considering the school one they would never attend as an undergraduate.</p>

<p>PS Regarding the budget, I hope the private donations work wonders, when the school will start feeling how hard it is to pay its own bills as the federal government stops being a blind and deaf sugar daddy.</p>

22

<p>for undergrad, i'd go with Rice; for grad I'd go with Berkley</p>

23

<p>
[quote]
Yep, yep, the day you'll start dropping the obvious and intentional exaggeration of Berkeley's greatness in about every post that seeks an opinion about different programs.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>I highly doubt you've read as much as half of my posts regarding Berkeley, xiggi. I really don't feel that I"m exaggerating in general, either. But even if I am exagerrating, I don't see how that justifies your hyperbole (which you clearly recognize given your response to my post). If you think that I'm doing something that you think I shouldn't do, how does that justify your doing what you shouldn't do? Or maybe you think you should exaggerate? To mislead, perhaps? That probably helps people a lot. </p>

<p>Maybe you could point me to my exaggerated points (anything even a tenth as much as your initial post in this thread), any misleading posts where I talk about how Berkeley is the best in this field or that field or everyfield, and how going anywhere else is ridiculous and stupid. No, I say things like

[quote]

Both are great. Go to either and you'll be fine. I'd pick on fit- where do you want to be for 3-5 years or so? Where would you be happier? Definitely visit Rice.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Sounds exaggerated to me.</p>

<p>
[quote]
Berkeley is a great school, but is is far from being among the best in EVERY department

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Yeah, Berkeley is a great school. Did I say it was or is close to being the best school in every (or even any) department? Ever heard of a straw man? I don't think it's perfect or anything.</p>

<p>
[quote]
especially its undergraduate division which rides on the coattails and reputation of the graduate programs.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Part of Berkeley's undergraduate reputation comes in part because of the grad programs, but so what? I guess it's WAY different than other schools who have part of their reputation from their graduate programs, such as Harvard and Stanford? Even if you say the difference between the quality is wider at Berkeley, which may be the case, the supposed gap, at least on cc, is exaggerated, and in many ways the things that make Berkeley good for grads is shared with undergraduates. Is Berkeley perfect? Nope (not that I think any school is). Does Berkeley have problems, at least in my eyes? Yes. Does some undergraduate programs lack in certain ways? Sure. Are many still amazing? You bet.</p>

<p>Did you get rejected or something? Or maybe your kid (I thought you were older- but I also thought you were somewhat mature than you're currently acting). Could you respond to my questions that relate to your claims, or do you admit to having no legitimate answers?</p>

<p>What do you know of Berkeley? What is your relationship to it?
How is the students body hopelessly different from the rest of the country? Are you both familiar enough with the student body at Berkeley to judge it and familiar enough with the rest of the country to judge it? IN what ways are the students so special here, and are you looking hard enough elswhere to find similar students? What do you know of the experiences of a graduate versus an undergraduate here? </p>

<p>
[quote]
It may be hard for the Berkeley pompom crowd to understand that students who have a choice of schools see Berkeley through very different eyes, including considering the school one they would never attend as an undergraduate.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Great. I wouldn't mind if Berkeley's yield were higher, but 40% of the students admitted enroll. To me, that hardly sounds like a place where students feel that they would never attend as an undergraduate. But y'know what? Many who choose not to attend do so for good reasons, whatever they may be, and many others do so for really poor reasons (such as "It's impossible to graduate in four years")- the kind of stuff you're repeating.</p>

<p>About the % of the students going to get PhDs, I think Rice's numbers are great. Berkeley's isn't bad, but certainly could be higher. However, I just think there are probably many factors involved, many factors behind the stat we see. For instance, one thing that could possibly explain some of the difference could be engineering. Berkeley has a huge engineering division, and engineers tend not to get PhDs unless they plan on trying to go into academia or to research. Many merely get masters in engineering, and MBAs are another popular degree. 11% of Berkeley is in the college of engineering (which I think includes the engineering majors outside of the college), while only 6% of Rice is in the engineering division. It's possible that Rice attracts the types of students more interested in getting PhDs than Berkeley, or encourages students to get PhDs more than Berkeley does. This could be due to many factors, such as percentage of students who are the first to go to college, or income level. Obviously Rice 5.2% more of its students go on to receive PhDs between the years studied, which I imagine were the years in which the dates overlap (94-98), but we should ask why this is so. Maybe it's because Berkeley is a terrible school, or its students are poor, or this or that, but we should ask why the numbers work out the way they did, and it could be that they don't have much to do with the schools, although they very well could be entirely or greatly because of the schools.</p>

24

<p>
[quote]

*posted by: bandit_TX *</p>

<p>Berkley may be better known among everyday people, but it does not have a better reputation in the academic circles. Both are top 20 schools.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Excuse me. This is NOT at all true especially if the applicant wants to pursue his/her career in the Far East. The general prestige of Berkeley anywhere in Asia is about the same as Harvard's, and that means it's even in a small bit more popular and more prestigious than Stanford and MIT both by the ordinary guys walking in the streets and by the intellectural elite circles (HRDs of top corporation, University Professors, etc.). Again, just a bit. Rice is a fine school but it's not well-known in Asia. That alone is a serious thing that needs to be considered.</p>

25

<p>
[quote]

*posted by: xiggi *</p>

<p>Yep, yep, the day you'll start dropping the obvious and intentional exaggeration of Berkeley's greatness in about every post that seeks an opinion about different programs. Berkeley is a great school, but is is far from being among the best in EVERY department, and especially its undergraduate division which rides on the coattails and reputation of the graduate programs.

[/quote]

Well, name us a university or an academic institution that sucks in graduate programs but is considered world-class. </p>

<p>I seriously think there's any. Why? Because the truth of the matter is, any university has to rely and bank its prestige on how great their output is as demonstrated by their research. </p>

<p>
[quote]

It may be hard for the Berkeley pompom crowd to understand that students who have a choice of schools see Berkeley through very different eyes, including considering the school one they would never attend as an undergraduate.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Berkeley = pompom crowd? I wonder which mountain did you grow up? </p>

<p>I turned down Harvard, Princeton and Stanford for Berkeley's world-class Physics.</p>

26

<p>
[quote]
I turned down Harvard, Princeton and Stanford for Berkeley's world-class Physics.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Harvard, Princeton, and Stanford all have yield ratings of over 65% (and Harvard's is nearly 80%). Berkeley's yield is about 40%. Furthermore, HPS beat Berkeley on cross-admit data. So at the undergraduate level, Berkeley is not considered as desirable as HPS. This point is further reinforced by the revealed preferences ranking. </p>

<p><a href="http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=601105%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=601105&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

27

<p>
[quote]
Excuse me. This is NOT at all true especially if the applicant wants to pursue his/her career in the Far East. The general prestige of Berkeley anywhere in Asia is about the same as Harvard's, and that means it's even in a small bit more popular and more prestigious than Stanford and MIT both by the ordinary guys walking in the streets and by the intellectural elite circles (HRDs of top corporation, University Professors, etc.).

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Again, from all my travels in East Asia, I have never seen any evidence that would lead me to conclude that Berkeley is considered more popular or more prestigious than Stanford or MIT, not even by a small bit.</p>

28

<p>Whenever there's a discussion about Berkeley, I see people mentioning its apparently huge popularity in the Far East; however, I'm not sure how relevant that is for most students, especially those on the College Confidential forum. Sure, for some people, this would be an important factor, but I think most of the students who attend Berkeley (and correct me if I'm wrong) do not end up working in the Far East. The more pertinent factor would be Berkeley's prestige in the United States, which is pretty good, but not all that much better than most schools of the same caliber.</p>

29

<p>If you want jobs in Asia go to Berkeley, they view it as Harvard's equal. Rice is 50% texans, and berkely is 40% asian, so take a look into the percentages, which one do you like better?</p>

30

<p>Drab, thank you for defending berkeley not using the typical hyperbole of its supporters "berkeley is the best school in the country, etc. etc. etc."</p>

31

<p>Dorian_Mode, care to ellaborate about "but not all that much better than most schools of the same caliber?"</p>

32

<p>"Excuse me. This is NOT at all true especially if the applicant wants to pursue his/her career in the Far East. The general prestige of Berkeley anywhere in Asia is about the same as Harvard's, and that means it's even in a small bit more popular and more prestigious than Stanford and MIT both by the ordinary guys walking in the streets and by the intellectural elite circles (HRDs of top corporation, University Professors, etc.). Again, just a bit. Rice is a fine school but it's not well-known in Asia. That alone is a serious thing that needs to be considered."</p>

<p>lol... for those of us who want to go work for misinformed eastern companies, this should be taken into serious consideration</p>

33

<p>I would agree that RICE and Berkeley have strong programs. My only complaint with Berkeley,which I also have with other state schools, is that their quality is dependant on their state funding. If California gets into a tight economic situation, all of the California state schools will suffer. </p>

<p>Moreover, they won't raise tuition to keep up the quality for political reasons. These are not problems for RICE.</p>

34

<p>"Berkeley = pompom crowd? I wonder which mountain did you grow up? "</p>

<p>Finding critical reading a bit challenged by, Sansai? The pompon crowd comprises posters such as yourself ... the ones who never stop waving the darn things enough to face as modicum of reality. And, as far, as mountains go, you might try to climb one on occasion ... the view is usually much better than one enjoyed from a cave. </p>

<p>"Because the truth of the matter is, any university has to rely and bank its prestige on how great their output is as demonstrated by their research."</p>

<p>That is why universities have not cornered the market on excellence in undergraduate education.</p>

35

<p>
[quote]
Dorian_Mode, care to ellaborate about "but not all that much better than most schools of the same caliber?"

[/quote]
</p>

<p>I think it's a pretty straightforward statement. From my experience, Berkeley is a well-respected school, but so are all of the other schools in the top 25 or so of the US News. I have never met a person, although I'm sure they're out there, who thought there was an appreciable difference between Berkeley and, say, Vanderbilt. They're different schools, but I think the difference in prestige for those below HYPSM is somewhat minimal.</p>

<p>Is my experience biased? Sure. Still, I don't think I've said anything particularly controversial.</p>

36

<p>Xiggi, are you having trouble answering my simple questions? Sansai's first language is not English, so critical reading in this language might be challenging for her. Some of her arguments seem not to work, but mine seem pretty good to me, and you seem to ignore them. </p>

<p>What do you know of Berkeley? What is your relationship to it?
How is the students body hopelessly different from the rest of the country? Are you both familiar enough with the student body at Berkeley to judge it and familiar enough with the rest of the country to judge it? In what ways are the students so special here, and are you looking hard enough elswhere to find similar students? What do you know of the experiences of a graduate versus an undergraduate here?</p>

<p>Honestly, I think Berkeley has more prestige and respect than schools of similar quality. I also do not agree with "They're different schools, but I think the difference in prestige for those below HYPSM is somewhat minimal." I think there is some significant range, especially in context of the world (and not just the US).</p>

37

<p>I know that I'm fairly critical of the UCs for their weaknesses in undergrad education, but xiggi...man... way to push it a BIT too far.</p>

38

<p>Xiggi:</p>

<p>
[quote]
If the undergraduate education matters, one schools does indeed shine, and it is not the school where it has become almost imposssible to graduate in four years, where the named professors are omnipresent but do not consider teaching undergraduate a great part of the job, where getting in the right classes is a constant ordeal, where housing is pathetically dismal, where the student body is hopelessly different from the rest of the country, where the imminent budget crush will be both unavoidable and hard felt.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Are you just ranting because you had a bad day or something (have your wife given you hard times recently, have you experienced multiple occasions of e.d.?)</p>

<p>
[quote]
It may be hard for the Berkeley pompom crowd to understand that students who have a choice of schools see Berkeley through very different eyes, including considering the school one they would never attend as an undergraduate.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>now now now, please…. what are you trying to say? Are you implying no smart students would attend Berkeley because its student body is hopelessly “different” from the rest of the country? </p>

<p>Xiggi,</p>

<p>I thought you are a well-balanced poster, evidenced by your 3000+ posts since Aug. 2004. I am not troubled by your expressing your “different” opinion about Berkeley and Rice per se: No one is enjoined from expressing his/her opinion in this forum. </p>

<p>However, I am very concerned that you are slandering Berkeley as a whole, the institution and its prominent academic tradition, not to mention its students and its alums. </p>

<p>You owe Berks an apology!!!</p>

39

<p>
[quote]
I think there is some significant range, especially in context of the world (and not just the US).

[/quote]

You can believe what you want, but remember that my initial point was that world context is most likely not nearly as important as US context for most students.</p>

40

<p>"Are you just ranting because you had a bad day or something (have your wife given you hard times recently, have you experienced multiple occasions of e.d.?)"</p>

<p>Rabban, your post above clearly shows how little you know about me--a fact that I could not care less about, btw. It is obvious that the truth seems to annoy some of you. </p>

<p>"However, I am very concerned that you are slandering Berkeley as a whole, the institution and its prominent academic tradition, not to mention its students and its alums." </p>

<p>FYI, I stand behind everyone of the comments I posted about Berkeley ... everyone of them. Before "requesting" an apology from another poster, learn how to discuss the contents of one's post. Having to revert to ad hominem attacks is simply pathetic, yet not surprising. And for the record, you may want to check the definition of slander before hurling terms without much tought. There are two standards for slander: the information has to be false, and there ought to be a malicious intent. FYI, I stand behind everyone of the comments I posted about Berkeley ... everyone of them. good luck showing my stemement to be false.</p>