<p>^ You do realize that admission rate is not the ONLY factor which determines student selectivity.</p>
<p>BTW, It’s 21% for Berkeley. 25% when you include Spring admits. The 18% admit rate for Cornell does not include wait-list students. The SATs averages are almost identical.</p>
<p>Berkeley as an institution is among the best in the world. It’s international reputation as an American school is second to only Harvard and maybe Stanford. This of course is because of it’s strength in both research and postgraduate programs… it’s UG, while great, is not even in the same stratosphere. Nobody (figure of speech, maybe a few do) would pick Cal over Stanford or Harvard at the UG level, in fact, I think you be incredibly stupid to, but at the grad level they are fairly comparable. </p>
<p>"Berkeley UG is an exceedingly reputable institution, in the same way that NYU UG is an exceedingly reputable institution–in fact, I am ready to argue that these two schools are peers–but neither of these schools are prestigious at the undergraduate level. "</p>
<p>LOL @ NYU being a “peer”. It’s a 3 trick pony- business, law and Tisch.</p>
<p>It’s ridiculously diverse. I think maybe that’s why.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I never had to do this ;)</p>
<p>Yes, Berkeley is more overcrowded than a top private school on many counts, but I’ve seriously been so casual about when I add and drop classes, aside from when I signed up for a popular breadth requirement, really only because it is easy and I don’t want to spend more time.</p>
<p>Quite a few people will just never have these problems. I’ve even heard a few good students argue, much to my amusement, that they never knew anyone who had trouble getting into a class.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Small classes are abundant at Berkeley too. There are just a lot of large ones too.</p>
<p>Berkeley also accepts a lot more students total, many possessing zero interest in research, and many others generally not the most academically inclined people in the world. I think for a Berkeley student who really deserves to do research, the opportunities are abundant. </p>
<p>Another thing is that Berkeley experiences vary hugely depending on your major. The 17:1 ratio, I have not checked, but appears to be generic. I feel like there are almost TOO MANY amazing professors at Berkeley and too few people who want to actually take advantage of what they have to offer. But that’s colored by my experiences in my own major, and others I know more closely.</p>
<p>This is untrue in overcrowded departments like MCB, perhaps, which might be why the premeds always complain.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>This is mostly irrelevant as a remark. It speaks nothing to the quality of the university. This is hugely a function of frosh having ego issues and not even considering Berkeley when compared to more prestigious schools for undergrad. We accept a lot of students at Berkeley, but realistically the quality of the faculty and academic opportunities are easily greater than what is offered on many counts by more prestigious counterparts.</p>
<p>Stanford is unique in how strong it is in various academic departments - few schools manage that, and Berkeley is one of the few which does as well.</p>
<p>Those who argue that none of this matters for undergrad are completely kidding themselves. You’re here to educate yourself - how the heck does departmental strength, breadth of excellence in various areas of study, etc not figure in? It’s TOUGH to start appreciating all that difficult academics, but it’s what you’re paying for a world class education for.</p>
<p>It’s a little sad to go to a great school and expect employers to fawn all over you just because you got a high SAT score in high school and some admissions committee selected you among several other candidates who were probably just as good as you…and then say that none of the actual academics your school is known for matters for undergrad.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Seconded. To all those who take the ‘HYPSM’ string of letters seriously - read MIT’s admissions blogs and everything else the folks there take the effort to write, and know that they’d probably be very frustrated if someone mentioned MIT alongside a lot of the other schools - each of those schools is distinct. And MIT is definitely especially different.</p>
<p>lol @ RML. So funny.</p>
<p>As much as RML may be giving more credit to Berkeley selectivity than is due, there is something intelligent to be taken from his points.</p>
<p>CaptnJack, to take the examples of Duke, Cornell - as you yourself probably are aware, a lot of the students considering those schools probably wanted to go to Harvard or Yale or Stanford or something…and didn’t make it. </p>
<p>But in reality, there are lots of hyper-qualified students who don’t make it to these CC-glorified top schools, and frankly according to a lot of people, some of the alternatives who did make it probably had their good day, and that’s about it. People who actually attend those schools admit that there are only a very few true superstars at them. A lot of the stars are scattered.</p>
<p>RML’s comments and the facts I stated should get you and quite a few people thinking - why feel so good about taking admission to Cornell or Duke as a ‘second best’ ? They’re really not even that elite. There are frankly lots of students at those schools who are also not exactly elite students. Maybe they’re more elite than the average Berkeley student. But if you’re a top student with an ego, is your ego really going to be satisfied with that? Is Cornell actually even elite enough that it’s not a little silly to start comparing 18 and 25?</p>
<p>I feel like given the insane selectivity, getting into Harvard probably does make someone feel really good, but I understand it less with other schools. So yes, I kind of do think RML has a bit of a point here.</p>
<p>My advice to people who don’t make it to the so-called ‘HYPS’ schools is - swallow your ego. Nobody’s going to think you’re a genius anymore. Focus on getting somewhere good in the next few years. I mean, nobody will look at the name of your school and really glorify you for it. But you can still respect yourself enough to try to perform well in college. In 4 years, you will part ways with people and be who knows where. Once you’re out of high school, it’s really time to stop thinking in terms of eliteness of school name and things like that, except in context of real career boost. </p>
<p>That doesn’t mean choose Berkeley - no, not if it won’t meet your needs. Not if you’re going to enter a pestilential overcrowded major and don’t want to put up with that. But some people get by just fine with those majors - they just might have been happier elsewhere.</p>
<p>For the record, I chose Berkeley over Cornell and Carnegie Mellon (was rejected by MIT/Caltech) although my situation might be a little different since i’m in EECS.</p>
<p>Also, i’m out of state so the tuition/fees i have to pay at berkeley are comparable to the privates, if not more.</p>
<p>Speaking candidly, If I had gotten in everywhere i would have chosen them in this order:
MIT
Berkeley tied with Caltech (IMHO comes to departmental prestige at Berkeley vs overall prestige at Caltech)
Carnegie Mellon
Cornell</p>
<p>CaptnJack, to be frank with you, your posts are no more laughable than mine. How’s your dream of attending MIT, by the way?</p>
<p>^ouch10chars</p>
<p>There is something very suspicious about the methodology used to rank universities when under “Masters Universities” CSU Dominguez Hills is ranked #84 while SJSU is ranked #204.</p>
<p>I’m going to UC Berkeley in the fall, and even though I have tons of school spirit and would argue in Berkeley’s favor in any situation, I have to admit that it is, in my opinion, not the best university in the world. The best universities in the world are Harvard, Yale, Princeton, and Stanford (MIT is sometimes considered in this list). I’d say that Berkeley places second to that tier of schools, which is still pretty damn good.</p>
<p>Whenever someone specifies “best”, it would be helpful if the criterion used to evaluate were stated clearly, so perhaps other posters can either speak in agreement or dissent.</p>
<p>I don’t think there is a “best” … why is Columbia not on that list? Why is UChicago not on that list, for all its ultra-intellectualism and amazing faculty? How about Caltech, the school with apparently the most straightforwardly super-academic-oriented admissions process, and perhaps the hardest of all of them to survive?</p>
<p>If you want, for instance, to argue UChicago is not very well-known, well then Yale and Princeton may be significantly less well known than Berkeley in some areas of the world, while MIT would be unquestionably known…despite your saying MIT is just sometimes considered on the list. Stanford would be unquestionably at the top to many - just look at its breadth of departmental strength, the fact that its undergrad students are supposed to generally be very happy, its contributions to technology … heck, the only reason some people would look at HYP is that those are the longstanding top Ivy Leagues. </p>
<p>Also, look at the graduates churned out by these schools. In which cases are they significantly stronger than the graduates churned out by other schools? Which one helps the top student most? Which helps the bottom student most. Do not attempt to argue that it doesn’t matter where the top student goes, because he/she will do well anywhere … because frankly, the top notch students often aim for difficult to achieve things, and need all the help they can get to achieve those things.</p>
<p>By the way, I am a huge fan of Harvard, and any so-called attempt to diminish it above was just giving one of many naive arguments people give to oversimplify the situation.</p>
<p>I have less of a problem with people claiming Berkeley should certainly not be considered a top tier undergraduate school than when they claim certain specific schools certainly are.</p>
<p>Back on topic guys…</p>
<p>The original question was “Why is UC Berkeley the best univ. in the world?”</p>
<p>The answer is: “It is not the best univ. in the world, but among the best - in some areas.”</p>
<p>^ if a university is not the best in all areas, you cannot call it “THE best” irrefutably.</p>
<p>hence why you “answer” is just plain stupid. “among the best—in SOME areas.” what area did you have in mind? even Berkeley is number 1 in SOME categories. so we <em>are</em> the best when you pinpoint those. and we are “among” the best in ALL --yes…ALL–areas. </p>
<p>ridiculous.</p>
<p>If the criteria are:</p>
<ol>
<li>academic prestige</li>
<li>academic standard</li>
<li>wealth</li>
<li>opportunities after graduation</li>
<li>faculty quality</li>
<li>research output</li>
<li>student quality (both undergrad and grad)</li>
<li>popularity</li>
</ol>
<p>then Harvard would emerge as the best university in the world. Cambridge, Oxford, Stanford and MIT closely follow. Then Berkeley, Princeton, Yale and Caltech.</p>
<p>^ HYPSMC/Oxbridge come first, and then comes CAL, because Cal is considered to have a deficient undergraduate program compared to those schools. Cal more than makes up for it with legendary across-the-board departmental strength, but a school’s overall prestige is often tied to its undergraduate selectivity, and unless Cal starts cutting the “tail end” of its undergraduate population, it will be considered below the aforementioned schools. It’s amazing that Cal could easily have the same SAT averages as HYP by only rejecting more students, but can’t because of the Public school’s overall purpose to serve the state.</p>
<p>Berkeley would probably be considered “the best” for undergraduate as well, if it cut the bottom 50% of undergraduates in coming years. Admit rates and SAT scores would rise beyond lower ivies, and class sizes would fall dramatically. Schools like Emory and WashU definitely couldn’t perform such feats, and if they could, they would.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Yes, Math and MCB are probably polar opposites in terms of how big one’s major courses are. MCB is the largest major on campus, so even upper division courses will be huge, not to mention the lower division Chemistry 1A/3A/3B and Biology 1A/1B courses shared with IB and non-biology-major pre-meds.</p>
<p>Math majors, on the other hand, might have only one course in their major over 25 or so students. They probably had AP Calculus with a 5, so they probably skip at least 1A and possibly 1B. Some may have taken 53 and/or 54 at a local college while still in high school. If they need to take 1B, 53, and/or 54, they may choose the 25 student (but rarely full) H1B, H53, and/or H54. Math 55 has no smaller honors version, and may be bigger than 25 students, but is probably not too big since CS now has its own version of the course. And all upper division and graduate math courses are small.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Of course, it depends on what you study. Those aiming for a career in engineering will probably rank MIT, Stanford, and Berkeley higher than Harvard, Yale, and Princeton, for example. MIT probably does best out of these schools at ensuring that its graduates have a well rounded liberal arts education, regardless of major.</p>