Is what every says about Cal Berkeley true?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My DS is a math and humanities major. The math classes were brutally tough and like another person mentioned DS was shocked to get his first C+ but has now learned to do better. The choices in math classes are amazing. The history classes are also a lot of work but getting As is not as difficult. Overall, he has learned to adapt and hustle and has had great internships every summer through friend referrals. He even found a 5-week internship at a startup for winter break. He is a very adaptable kid and is fine with large settings so that may have helped. After freshman year, he found his own housing.

It sounds like your child is the type of self-starter who can do well there. Congrats, they should do well wherever they go. There are many very bright people there and the very self-reliant can learn alot. But, that is very different from receiving an 'elite' education. It is making the most of a fast-paced factory education.

Not PP. Pretty sure the history proseminars or taking econ classes with Bates Clark/Nobel winners aren’t a “factory education.”

The point is those opportunities don't really happen though people like to tell themselves otherwise.

A Nobel winning economist at UCB (or anywhere else) will rarely (read virtually never) teach an undergraduate course. It is a waste of their time which is a valuable resource.

I have a close friend who is a full professor at Stanford who very matter of factly states that he hasn't taught an undergraduate class in over 20 years and that it would be a waste of his time and Stanford's money for him to do so. The same factors come into play at any top research university. UCB is a great grad school but nothing special for undergraduate studies.

Except David Card taught undergrads up until the point he went into emeritus status.

Emmanuel Saez and Emi Nakamura regularly have undergrad teaching responsibilities.

Not to mention other professors without the awards that are still notable (Eichengreen, Delong).

They all teach undergrads there. That’s hardly a factory education.

We’ve seen your posts before about your one friend that is a professor at Stanford, but it’s a sample of one and isn’t particularly useful.

True, but if you've seen my posts you would also know that I taught at UCB while in grad school.
You’re not the only one with access to a course catalog at Berkeley.

No idea what you are trying to say, none at all.

PP: I enjoyed my time at UCB, it's a great grad school. I learned a lot and I went on to have a very lucrative and fulfilling career. But, based on my observations and experiences while I was there as a grad student it is not a particularly great option for most for undergraduate education. People will keep on saying otherwise but most full professors do not teach undergrads, they do not want to teach undergrads, and it is a waste of their time if they are.

You’re a disingenuous liar for the most part. There are full professors teaching undergrads all the time at Berkeley.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My DS is a math and humanities major. The math classes were brutally tough and like another person mentioned DS was shocked to get his first C+ but has now learned to do better. The choices in math classes are amazing. The history classes are also a lot of work but getting As is not as difficult. Overall, he has learned to adapt and hustle and has had great internships every summer through friend referrals. He even found a 5-week internship at a startup for winter break. He is a very adaptable kid and is fine with large settings so that may have helped. After freshman year, he found his own housing.

It sounds like your child is the type of self-starter who can do well there. Congrats, they should do well wherever they go. There are many very bright people there and the very self-reliant can learn alot. But, that is very different from receiving an 'elite' education. It is making the most of a fast-paced factory education.

Not PP. Pretty sure the history proseminars or taking econ classes with Bates Clark/Nobel winners aren’t a “factory education.”

Are grad students still teaching those proseminars?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My DS is a math and humanities major. The math classes were brutally tough and like another person mentioned DS was shocked to get his first C+ but has now learned to do better. The choices in math classes are amazing. The history classes are also a lot of work but getting As is not as difficult. Overall, he has learned to adapt and hustle and has had great internships every summer through friend referrals. He even found a 5-week internship at a startup for winter break. He is a very adaptable kid and is fine with large settings so that may have helped. After freshman year, he found his own housing.

It sounds like your child is the type of self-starter who can do well there. Congrats, they should do well wherever they go. There are many very bright people there and the very self-reliant can learn alot. But, that is very different from receiving an 'elite' education. It is making the most of a fast-paced factory education.

Not PP. Pretty sure the history proseminars or taking econ classes with Bates Clark/Nobel winners aren’t a “factory education.”

Are grad students still teaching those proseminars?

Let’s see:
Spring 2026
Proseminar: Problems in Interpretation in the Several Fields of History: Middle East

World War I in the Middle East
Taught by full professor Christine Philliou

Proseminar: Problems in Interpretation in the Several Fields of History: Europe

The Rise of Global Empires and Imperial Culture in Early Modern Europe, 1400-1800
Taught by Full professor Thomas Dandelet

Proseminar: Problems in Interpretation in the Several Fields of History: United States
Taught by full professor David M Henkin

Proseminar: Problems in Interpretation in the Several Fields of History: Asia
Taught by full professor Michael Nylan

Proseminar: Problems in Interpretation in the Several Fields of History: United States
Taught by tenure track assistant professor Jaime Sanchez

Proseminar: Problems in Interpretation in the Several Fields of History: Comparative History
Taught by Visiting Lecturer Ari S Edmundson

Proseminar: Problems in Interpretation in the Several Fields of History: Middle East
Taught by Full Professor Ussama Makdisi

And the list goes on and on…you can definitely avoid visiting lecturers if that is of serious concern, but for the most part, you’re getting tenure track professors.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My DS is a math and humanities major. The math classes were brutally tough and like another person mentioned DS was shocked to get his first C+ but has now learned to do better. The choices in math classes are amazing. The history classes are also a lot of work but getting As is not as difficult. Overall, he has learned to adapt and hustle and has had great internships every summer through friend referrals. He even found a 5-week internship at a startup for winter break. He is a very adaptable kid and is fine with large settings so that may have helped. After freshman year, he found his own housing.

It sounds like your child is the type of self-starter who can do well there. Congrats, they should do well wherever they go. There are many very bright people there and the very self-reliant can learn alot. But, that is very different from receiving an 'elite' education. It is making the most of a fast-paced factory education.

Not PP. Pretty sure the history proseminars or taking econ classes with Bates Clark/Nobel winners aren’t a “factory education.”

Are grad students still teaching those proseminars?

Let’s see:
Spring 2026
Proseminar: Problems in Interpretation in the Several Fields of History: Middle East

World War I in the Middle East
Taught by full professor Christine Philliou

Proseminar: Problems in Interpretation in the Several Fields of History: Europe

The Rise of Global Empires and Imperial Culture in Early Modern Europe, 1400-1800
Taught by Full professor Thomas Dandelet

Proseminar: Problems in Interpretation in the Several Fields of History: United States
Taught by full professor David M Henkin

Proseminar: Problems in Interpretation in the Several Fields of History: Asia
Taught by full professor Michael Nylan

Proseminar: Problems in Interpretation in the Several Fields of History: United States
Taught by tenure track assistant professor Jaime Sanchez

Proseminar: Problems in Interpretation in the Several Fields of History: Comparative History
Taught by Visiting Lecturer Ari S Edmundson

Proseminar: Problems in Interpretation in the Several Fields of History: Middle East
Taught by Full Professor Ussama Makdisi

And the list goes on and on…you can definitely avoid visiting lecturers if that is of serious concern, but for the most part, you’re getting tenure track professors.

Show us the same thing on the STEM side where schools make their money.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Lots and lots of Asians at Cal. Definitely the dominant group.

Interesting how white people tell on themselves.

Asians are the largest group at Cal (41% of Fall 2024 entering students), hence, based upon white experience, they must be “dominant”.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t know why but Cal really embraces undergraduate kids who are willing to do anything to succeed. Cheating and sabotage have risen to a level of sophistication and pervasiveness across some largely represented groups that it isn’t the same place it used to be. Stress and depression is common with kids who don’t cheat and simply can’t compete by breaking the rules. If Cal removed the unethical students but kept the same level of rigor, students would bond more over failing together. Instead, they become isolated.

It’s sad because you grow and learn more by being challenged to failure. However, you can’t do that anymore.

huh?

They are talking about rampant cheating by Asian students. Pretty well known.

Asiana make up 40% of Harvard and other elite institutions so is this cheating only at Cal or also at other top schools as well. Somehow the biggest scammers like Trump, SBF and Holmes seem to not be Asians.

I have no idea whether Harvard turns a blind eye to cheating and sabotage the way Cal does. At Cal it is particularly bad because you have a much larger population of international Asian students and Asian American students whose families are still connected to their home countries. Cheating is not seen as immoral or unethical in several of these countries. If you can’t earn a A you are expected to cheat to get a A. Kids across cultures will be tempted to cheat but the Asian cultures support it at the family level. Large industries exist in their home countries to enable the cheating. The faculty do not like this at all but what can they do? Classes are large, the cheating methods are sophisticated, they can’t kick out a third of the class, and TAs are spread too thin to deal with this.

Years ago it used to really just be pre meds sabotaging each other’s labs but it happens pretty frequently in engineering too. The deflationary curve, coupled with cheating, makes kids desperate. Cal doesn’t really do anything about it either. The attitude is more you should never take your eyes off your lab or walk away from your screen.

When DCUM becomes Stormfront . . . . Take your racist jackassery elsewhere, my dude.

A few years ago UCLA publicly broke up a Chinese cheating ring. The LSAT is suspending giving the exam on mainland China due to many students with perfect LSAT scores arriving at top schools with very low English skills.

If you have any connection to current faculty or students at Cal, you’d know it is a reality.

This site is really turning into a cesspool when it comes to racism against Asians. Something that happened in China (assuming this is true) means Asian American students are massively cheating?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Depends on the major.

As an engineering major? Yes. It was brutal. I have never heard of anyone's tests getting curved down before because the competition was so fierce. My freshman calculus class, 10% of the class got 100 on the first exam, so a 99% was a B due to the curve. My C+ became an F. It was insanely hard.

This was 20 years ago, but math classes were so overenrolled, if you didn't get to class 20 minutes early, there wasn't a seat in the 500 person lecture hall and you had to watch the video of the lecture from a satellite location. It was not fun.

My elective classes weren't bad though. Anything humanities was fun.

This was not my experience at all. I also never heard of anyone getting F’s in math unless they were seriously slacking and not going to class at all.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:OP do you know of top STEM schools that are happy collaborative places with hand holding? Cal is great but you have to be self motivated in your studies. DH thought it was a fun place too. Made enduring friendships

Harvey Mudd, MIT, Brown (yes, it's a top STEM school), Rice

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I don’t know why but Cal really embraces undergraduate kids who are willing to do anything to succeed. Cheating and sabotage have risen to a level of sophistication and pervasiveness across some largely represented groups that it isn’t the same place it used to be. Stress and depression is common with kids who don’t cheat and simply can’t compete by breaking the rules. If Cal removed the unethical students but kept the same level of rigor, students would bond more over failing together. Instead, they become isolated.

It’s sad because you grow and learn more by being challenged to failure. However, you can’t do that anymore.

What's your evidence that Cal knowingly embraces these kids?
How does the existence of these kids mean you can't be challenged to failure? Wouldn't them breaking the curves make it more common for the remaining kids to be challenged to failure?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My DS is a math and humanities major. The math classes were brutally tough and like another person mentioned DS was shocked to get his first C+ but has now learned to do better. The choices in math classes are amazing. The history classes are also a lot of work but getting As is not as difficult. Overall, he has learned to adapt and hustle and has had great internships every summer through friend referrals. He even found a 5-week internship at a startup for winter break. He is a very adaptable kid and is fine with large settings so that may have helped. After freshman year, he found his own housing.

It sounds like your child is the type of self-starter who can do well there. Congrats, they should do well wherever they go. There are many very bright people there and the very self-reliant can learn alot. But, that is very different from receiving an 'elite' education. It is making the most of a fast-paced factory education.

Not PP. Pretty sure the history proseminars or taking econ classes with Bates Clark/Nobel winners aren’t a “factory education.”

The point is those opportunities don't really happen though people like to tell themselves otherwise.

A Nobel winning economist at UCB (or anywhere else) will rarely (read virtually never) teach an undergraduate course. It is a waste of their time which is a valuable resource.

I have a close friend who is a full professor at Stanford who very matter of factly states that he hasn't taught an undergraduate class in over 20 years and that it would be a waste of his time and Stanford's money for him to do so. The same factors come into play at any top research university. UCB is a great grad school but nothing special for undergraduate studies.

Except David Card taught undergrads up until the point he went into emeritus status.

Emmanuel Saez and Emi Nakamura regularly have undergrad teaching responsibilities.

Not to mention other professors without the awards that are still notable (Eichengreen, Delong).

They all teach undergrads there. That’s hardly a factory education.

We’ve seen your posts before about your one friend that is a professor at Stanford, but it’s a sample of one and isn’t particularly useful.

True, but if you've seen my posts you would also know that I taught at UCB while in grad school.
You’re not the only one with access to a course catalog at Berkeley.

No idea what you are trying to say, none at all.

PP: I enjoyed my time at UCB, it's a great grad school. I learned a lot and I went on to have a very lucrative and fulfilling career. But, based on my observations and experiences while I was there as a grad student it is not a particularly great option for most for undergraduate education. People will keep on saying otherwise but most full professors do not teach undergrads, they do not want to teach undergrads, and it is a waste of their time if they are.

You’re a disingenuous liar for the most part. There are full professors teaching undergrads all the time at Berkeley.

How can you call them a liar when you won't even refute their statement? They said most, you tacitly agreed with them by not saying most do teach undergrads, and instead saying profs teach undergrads all the time, which is fully compatible with most profs not teaching undergrads

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My DS is a math and humanities major. The math classes were brutally tough and like another person mentioned DS was shocked to get his first C+ but has now learned to do better. The choices in math classes are amazing. The history classes are also a lot of work but getting As is not as difficult. Overall, he has learned to adapt and hustle and has had great internships every summer through friend referrals. He even found a 5-week internship at a startup for winter break. He is a very adaptable kid and is fine with large settings so that may have helped. After freshman year, he found his own housing.

It sounds like your child is the type of self-starter who can do well there. Congrats, they should do well wherever they go. There are many very bright people there and the very self-reliant can learn alot. But, that is very different from receiving an 'elite' education. It is making the most of a fast-paced factory education.

Not PP. Pretty sure the history proseminars or taking econ classes with Bates Clark/Nobel winners aren’t a “factory education.”

The point is those opportunities don't really happen though people like to tell themselves otherwise.

A Nobel winning economist at UCB (or anywhere else) will rarely (read virtually never) teach an undergraduate course. It is a waste of their time which is a valuable resource.

I have a close friend who is a full professor at Stanford who very matter of factly states that he hasn't taught an undergraduate class in over 20 years and that it would be a waste of his time and Stanford's money for him to do so. The same factors come into play at any top research university. UCB is a great grad school but nothing special for undergraduate studies.

Except David Card taught undergrads up until the point he went into emeritus status.

Emmanuel Saez and Emi Nakamura regularly have undergrad teaching responsibilities.

Not to mention other professors without the awards that are still notable (Eichengreen, Delong).

They all teach undergrads there. That’s hardly a factory education.

We’ve seen your posts before about your one friend that is a professor at Stanford, but it’s a sample of one and isn’t particularly useful.

True, but if you've seen my posts you would also know that I taught at UCB while in grad school.
You’re not the only one with access to a course catalog at Berkeley.

No idea what you are trying to say, none at all.

PP: I enjoyed my time at UCB, it's a great grad school. I learned a lot and I went on to have a very lucrative and fulfilling career. But, based on my observations and experiences while I was there as a grad student it is not a particularly great option for most for undergraduate education. People will keep on saying otherwise but most full professors do not teach undergrads, they do not want to teach undergrads, and it is a waste of their time if they are.

You’re a disingenuous liar for the most part. There are full professors teaching undergrads all the time at Berkeley.

How can you call them a liar when you won't even refute their statement? They said most, you tacitly agreed with them by not saying most do teach undergrads, and instead saying profs teach undergrads all the time, which is fully compatible with most profs not teaching undergrads

Why are you creating logic puzzles?

[Anonymous]

This thread is falling into the "Russian agitator" pattern. The thread was the very last thread on the main page, was about to fall off (and so be less likely to get reactions), and someone posted a throwaway/open-ended/pot-stirring question. I've seen this in other emotionally-charged threads from other schools (Virginia public school threads often end up like this). It's so clearly trying to get people upset at one another, and I'd encourage ignoring it and letting the thread die. (Though I expect the same poster as 11:20 to post a sock-puppet response that just gets people fired up again. Just ignore it.)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This thread is falling into the "Russian agitator" pattern. The thread was the very last thread on the main page, was about to fall off (and so be less likely to get reactions), and someone posted a throwaway/open-ended/pot-stirring question. I've seen this in other emotionally-charged threads from other schools (Virginia public school threads often end up like this). It's so clearly trying to get people upset at one another, and I'd encourage ignoring it and letting the thread die. (Though I expect the same poster as 11:20 to post a sock-puppet response that just gets people fired up again. Just ignore it.)

No I just responded back to a comment sent to me. It’s not sockpuppeting to keto up on a thread I contributed to.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t know why but Cal really embraces undergraduate kids who are willing to do anything to succeed. Cheating and sabotage have risen to a level of sophistication and pervasiveness across some largely represented groups that it isn’t the same place it used to be. Stress and depression is common with kids who don’t cheat and simply can’t compete by breaking the rules. If Cal removed the unethical students but kept the same level of rigor, students would bond more over failing together. Instead, they become isolated.

It’s sad because you grow and learn more by being challenged to failure. However, you can’t do that anymore.

huh?

They are talking about rampant cheating by Asian students. Pretty well known.

Asiana make up 40% of Harvard and other elite institutions so is this cheating only at Cal or also at other top schools as well. Somehow the biggest scammers like Trump, SBF and Holmes seem to not be Asians.

I have no idea whether Harvard turns a blind eye to cheating and sabotage the way Cal does. At Cal it is particularly bad because you have a much larger population of international Asian students and Asian American students whose families are still connected to their home countries. Cheating is not seen as immoral or unethical in several of these countries. If you can’t earn a A you are expected to cheat to get a A. Kids across cultures will be tempted to cheat but the Asian cultures support it at the family level. Large industries exist in their home countries to enable the cheating. The faculty do not like this at all but what can they do? Classes are large, the cheating methods are sophisticated, they can’t kick out a third of the class, and TAs are spread too thin to deal with this.

Years ago it used to really just be pre meds sabotaging each other’s labs but it happens pretty frequently in engineering too. The deflationary curve, coupled with cheating, makes kids desperate. Cal doesn’t really do anything about it either. The attitude is more you should never take your eyes off your lab or walk away from your screen.

When DCUM becomes Stormfront . . . . Take your racist jackassery elsewhere, my dude.

A few years ago UCLA publicly broke up a Chinese cheating ring. The LSAT is suspending giving the exam on mainland China due to many students with perfect LSAT scores arriving at top schools with very low English skills.

If you have any connection to current faculty or students at Cal, you’d know it is a reality.

I know many Cal graduates, a few profs/instructors, and a couple current students in the really real meat world, which is very different from the html-pixelated world people here mistake for reality.

Also, do they teach rhetoric, statistics, or notions sample-size at Fourth Reich University? Some Chinese kids cheating a few years ago at another university or LSAT testing policy in China does not reasonably support any inference of mass undergraduate cheating by pan-Asians at Berkeley in the present.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t know why but Cal really embraces undergraduate kids who are willing to do anything to succeed. Cheating and sabotage have risen to a level of sophistication and pervasiveness across some largely represented groups that it isn’t the same place it used to be. Stress and depression is common with kids who don’t cheat and simply can’t compete by breaking the rules. If Cal removed the unethical students but kept the same level of rigor, students would bond more over failing together. Instead, they become isolated.

It’s sad because you grow and learn more by being challenged to failure. However, you can’t do that anymore.

huh?

They are talking about rampant cheating by Asian students. Pretty well known.

Asiana make up 40% of Harvard and other elite institutions so is this cheating only at Cal or also at other top schools as well. Somehow the biggest scammers like Trump, SBF and Holmes seem to not be Asians.

I have no idea whether Harvard turns a blind eye to cheating and sabotage the way Cal does. At Cal it is particularly bad because you have a much larger population of international Asian students and Asian American students whose families are still connected to their home countries. Cheating is not seen as immoral or unethical in several of these countries. If you can’t earn a A you are expected to cheat to get a A. Kids across cultures will be tempted to cheat but the Asian cultures support it at the family level. Large industries exist in their home countries to enable the cheating. The faculty do not like this at all but what can they do? Classes are large, the cheating methods are sophisticated, they can’t kick out a third of the class, and TAs are spread too thin to deal with this.

Years ago it used to really just be pre meds sabotaging each other’s labs but it happens pretty frequently in engineering too. The deflationary curve, coupled with cheating, makes kids desperate. Cal doesn’t really do anything about it either. The attitude is more you should never take your eyes off your lab or walk away from your screen.

When DCUM becomes Stormfront . . . . Take your racist jackassery elsewhere, my dude.

A few years ago UCLA publicly broke up a Chinese cheating ring. The LSAT is suspending giving the exam on mainland China due to many students with perfect LSAT scores arriving at top schools with very low English skills.

If you have any connection to current faculty or students at Cal, you’d know it is a reality.

I know many Cal graduates, a few profs/instructors, and a couple current students in the really real meat world, which is very different from the html-pixelated world people here mistake for reality.

Also, do they teach rhetoric, statistics, or notions sample-size at Fourth Reich University? Some Chinese kids cheating a few years ago at another university or LSAT testing policy in China does not reasonably support any inference of mass undergraduate cheating by pan-Asians at Berkeley in the present.

You have no qualifications and mostly speak out of your ass.