Is what every says about Cal Berkeley true?

[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.

One of us has actual grad school experience at UCB, the other person is you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'm also from California and went to UCLA. But I have a lot of friends who went to Cal. Like everything else, the echo chamber of the internet greatly exaggerates things that are often based on partial truths. Most of my friends, many of whom were CS majors, loved their time at Cal. It's certainly not a hold-your-hand place (neither was UCLA), but the vast majority of students find their way and are able the recognize that the university has vast resources available for those who pursue them. As much as this forum criticizes this approach, learning to hustle is a life skill and, so, this is not entirely a disadvantage.

Incidentally DD has a couple friends there--one a biology major and the other econ--and they seem to be thriving.

This is accurate. I’ll also add, at least from my perspective, that Berkeley’s reputation is largely based on the past. That fact, coupled with the fact that Berkeley admissions of late seems to value one-dimensional applicants more than the well-rounded applicants that UCLA admissions tends to favor, leads to more Asian and Indian students at Cal.

And if you understand the intense focus on education in these otherwise varied cultures across those huge regions of the world, it makes sense that the legacy reputation at Cal persists today.

[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

I'm OP so thought I would respond. DC is not looking for handholding, but would prefer a strong STEM college without a toxic, cutthroat culture. We constantly hear that kids should look for fit; is there not a college well-fitted for strong STEM kids yet is also collaborative? or is enduring mental health issues and the Hunger game a requirement to pursue STEM?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm also from California and went to UCLA. But I have a lot of friends who went to Cal. Like everything else, the echo chamber of the internet greatly exaggerates things that are often based on partial truths. Most of my friends, many of whom were CS majors, loved their time at Cal. It's certainly not a hold-your-hand place (neither was UCLA), but the vast majority of students find their way and are able the recognize that the university has vast resources available for those who pursue them. As much as this forum criticizes this approach, learning to hustle is a life skill and, so, this is not entirely a disadvantage.

Incidentally DD has a couple friends there--one a biology major and the other econ--and they seem to be thriving.

This is accurate. I’ll also add, at least from my perspective, that Berkeley’s reputation is largely based on the past. That fact, coupled with the fact that Berkeley admissions of late seems to value one-dimensional applicants more than the well-rounded applicants that UCLA admissions tends to favor, leads to more Asian and Indian students at Cal.

And if you understand the intense focus on education in these otherwise varied cultures across those huge regions of the world, it makes sense that the legacy reputation at Cal persists today.

But Cal limits the number of OOS and international students, so that can’t explain the high number of Indiana and Asian kids. A lot of them must be in-state California kids.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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

Are these school comparable to Cal in respectability among grad school admissions officers and STEM employers? Obviously MIT is but how about the other 3 listed here?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

That's not how asses work, mein Freund. But perhaps one needs to improvise when speaking beneath a white hood.

[Anonymous]

I advise students and had a client hire me to transfer out of Berkeley; they found it too intense, not fun, did not find their people, and wanted a more traditional college experience.

[Anonymous]

Berkeley, with all the other state schools in California, went test-blind when Covid happened, and has maintained that. The whole bottom end of the student population is now different than it once was, qv the students who got As in calculus, were admitted to UCSD, failed their placement test, and are now in a class that's trying to teach them elementary & middle school math.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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

I'm OP so thought I would respond. DC is not looking for handholding, but would prefer a strong STEM college without a toxic, cutthroat culture. We constantly hear that kids should look for fit; is there not a college well-fitted for strong STEM kids yet is also collaborative? or is enduring mental health issues and the Hunger game a requirement to pursue STEM?

If you are looking for less competitive/more collaborative, go to a lower ranked program. Kids that attend top 30 schools had to be driven and competitive to get in so it's not surprising that the culture at those schools is growing in those types of students. Especially if they are international where it's so hard to get into US schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm also from California and went to UCLA. But I have a lot of friends who went to Cal. Like everything else, the echo chamber of the internet greatly exaggerates things that are often based on partial truths. Most of my friends, many of whom were CS majors, loved their time at Cal. It's certainly not a hold-your-hand place (neither was UCLA), but the vast majority of students find their way and are able the recognize that the university has vast resources available for those who pursue them. As much as this forum criticizes this approach, learning to hustle is a life skill and, so, this is not entirely a disadvantage.

Incidentally DD has a couple friends there--one a biology major and the other econ--and they seem to be thriving.

This is accurate. I’ll also add, at least from my perspective, that Berkeley’s reputation is largely based on the past. That fact, coupled with the fact that Berkeley admissions of late seems to value one-dimensional applicants more than the well-rounded applicants that UCLA admissions tends to favor, leads to more Asian and Indian students at Cal.

And if you understand the intense focus on education in these otherwise varied cultures across those huge regions of the world, it makes sense that the legacy reputation at Cal persists today.

But Cal limits the number of OOS and international students, so that can’t explain the high number of Indiana and Asian kids. A lot of them must be in-state California kids.

There is a large Asian population in California especially in southern CA.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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

I'm OP so thought I would respond. DC is not looking for handholding, but would prefer a strong STEM college without a toxic, cutthroat culture. We constantly hear that kids should look for fit; is there not a college well-fitted for strong STEM kids yet is also collaborative? or is enduring mental health issues and the Hunger game a requirement to pursue STEM?

Two things on this.
1) If you mean "Engineering" when you say "STEM", I think ABET accreditation is the table stakes requirement, and then picking by vibe, location, etc. is fine. If you mean "non-Engineering [Science, Math]", you have far more options, and I would emphasize fit even more.
2) Regardless of "Eng" vs "Science/Math", I've heard really great things about the culture at Rice.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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

I'm OP so thought I would respond. DC is not looking for handholding, but would prefer a strong STEM college without a toxic, cutthroat culture. We constantly hear that kids should look for fit; is there not a college well-fitted for strong STEM kids yet is also collaborative? or is enduring mental health issues and the Hunger game a requirement to pursue STEM?

Two things on this.
1) If you mean "Engineering" when you say "STEM", I think ABET accreditation is the table stakes requirement, and then picking by vibe, location, etc. is fine. If you mean "non-Engineering [Science, Math]", you have far more options, and I would emphasize fit even more.
2) Regardless of "Eng" vs "Science/Math", I've heard really great things about the culture at Rice.

Is Rice as well-regarded by prospective employers and grad school admissions officers compared to schools like Cal, CMU and Cornell (so a tiny tad lower than MIT, Caltech, stanford)?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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

I'm OP so thought I would respond. DC is not looking for handholding, but would prefer a strong STEM college without a toxic, cutthroat culture. We constantly hear that kids should look for fit; is there not a college well-fitted for strong STEM kids yet is also collaborative? or is enduring mental health issues and the Hunger game a requirement to pursue STEM?

Two things on this.
1) If you mean "Engineering" when you say "STEM", I think ABET accreditation is the table stakes requirement, and then picking by vibe, location, etc. is fine. If you mean "non-Engineering [Science, Math]", you have far more options, and I would emphasize fit even more.
2) Regardless of "Eng" vs "Science/Math", I've heard really great things about the culture at Rice.

Is Rice as well-regarded by prospective employers and grad school admissions officers compared to schools like Cal, CMU and Cornell (so a tiny tad lower than MIT, Caltech, stanford)?

Yes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm also from California and went to UCLA. But I have a lot of friends who went to Cal. Like everything else, the echo chamber of the internet greatly exaggerates things that are often based on partial truths. Most of my friends, many of whom were CS majors, loved their time at Cal. It's certainly not a hold-your-hand place (neither was UCLA), but the vast majority of students find their way and are able the recognize that the university has vast resources available for those who pursue them. As much as this forum criticizes this approach, learning to hustle is a life skill and, so, this is not entirely a disadvantage.

Incidentally DD has a couple friends there--one a biology major and the other econ--and they seem to be thriving.

This is accurate. I’ll also add, at least from my perspective, that Berkeley’s reputation is largely based on the past. That fact, coupled with the fact that Berkeley admissions of late seems to value one-dimensional applicants more than the well-rounded applicants that UCLA admissions tends to favor, leads to more Asian and Indian students at Cal.

And if you understand the intense focus on education in these otherwise varied cultures across those huge regions of the world, it makes sense that the legacy reputation at Cal persists today.

But Cal limits the number of OOS and international students, so that can’t explain the high number of Indiana and Asian kids. A lot of them must be in-state California kids.

There is a large Asian population in California especially in southern CA.

Right, I get that. I am from California, but these kids are American so why would they be intense and one dimensional? Because they have immigrant parents that push that on the kids? Are the kids not assimilated?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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

I'm OP so thought I would respond. DC is not looking for handholding, but would prefer a strong STEM college without a toxic, cutthroat culture. We constantly hear that kids should look for fit; is there not a college well-fitted for strong STEM kids yet is also collaborative? or is enduring mental health issues and the Hunger game a requirement to pursue STEM?

Hi OP. I’ve only scanned the above so you may addressed. Are you in-state CA? If not do you even know if your kid can get in OOS to Cal? It’s a tough admit for OOS -that may make your next move on the decision tree much easier.