Real Madrid wrote:Dr. Dre wrote:Golden Bear 11 wrote:FACTS about Berkeley:
#6 in highest academic reputation (undergraduate) —U.S. News and World Report (February 2013)
LOL no one cares about this fact BECAUSE it is PURELY subjective
http://www.usnews.com/education/blogs/c ... -officials
Prestige is by its very definition "subjective," dolt. Which is why your posting in this thread is so hilariously ironic. On the one hand, you're arguing (without any factual support) that people in California and on the East Coast in general don't recognize Berkeley as being prestigious while presenting your own uninformed views on school prestige, and on the other hand, you balk at the idea of accepting "prestige rankings" as created by respected publications, claiming they're all "subjective."
First, your resort to personal insults says more about you than it does about him.
Second, there is a difference between reputation, prestige, and eliteness, which I think you are missing. Berkeley's academic reputation is fantastic, and that is what the USNWR ranking is measuring. In fact, I think Berkeley is just after Harvard in its ability to market a brand that everyone recognizes and associates with quality. I think prestige and eliteness are slightly different, though.
Third, I'm not sure that any ranking that puts the undergraduate academic reputation of Berkeley above Cal Tech can be fully trusted. I mean, Cal Tech has something like 900 undergrads, all of whom basically do Ph.D. level work by the time they graduate. Berkeley has several thousand community college transfers who graduate in things like "american studies." They really aren't comparable in terms of average quality of undergraduate students. To a certain extent, reputation rankings, especially ones that are from responses of faculty or administrators at other school, can't really measure the quality of undergraduates at another school. They'd have to be relying on students they get from that school who attend their grad schools (which is a selected group), or graduates that they'd meet professionally (another select group).
Finally, among ordinary people, I think Berkeley's reputation nationally and internationally is better than it is in California. It is precisely the accessibility, both in terms of undergraduate admission and cost, for California residents that removes a lot of the luster. Berkeley is a huge school, and has to take a certain number of in-state students. I know tons of people from my high school who went to Berkeley, and my high school was a shitshow. There was no awe associated with their admissions - it was pretty normal. On the other hand, if someone went to a top east coast school like Georgetown, you'd drop your jaw. I could see, though, that if you were not from California and were removed from both the accessibility and the tuition discount, and Berkeley was a bit more exotic, that you might hold it in higher esteem. In addition, if you were only exposed to the top performers from the school, which is likely the case if you are out of state or in grad school, then you'd have a higher impression. However, from where I stand, Berkeley is a great school, but doesn't invoke the same feeling from me as an Ivy League or equivalent (e.g. Stanford or Georgetown).