Top 8 Reasons Not to Go to Berkeley

[UCLAri]

<p>

Harvard is not at all competitive with schools like UC Berkeley, Caltech, or University of Chicago when it come to running and managing the major national science laboratories like JPL, Los Alamos, SLAC, Argonne, etc.

</p>

<p>That also has nothing to do with the fact that the schools and labs are geographically near one another?</p>

<p>And this doesn’t mean a thing when it comes to undergrad education in say…English. I don’t see how this should matter to me, as I was a poli sci major.</p>

<p>

But I hear that Harvard does have the Kennedy School of Government for aspiring politicians.

</p>

<p>KSG isn’t for aspiring politicians. It’s a public policy school. It grants MPPs. I should know, I’m an applicant there.</p>

<p>

When it comes down to practicing law, medicine, accounting, business, etc.

</p>

<p>Then why do all my friends in law school, med school, and B-school complain that their friends at Harvard, Yale, Stanford, etc. get all the breaks? Going to Harvard Law, even according to many law professors, helps QUITE a bit.</p>

<p>But this still has NOTHING to do with undergrad education.</p>

[sakky]

<p>

My central point is that it does not matter where a person goes to college. I proved my point and disproved your point.

</p>

<p>If that is the case, then you have no right to say that Berkeley is any better than any other school. So when some guy says that he thinks SF State is better than Berkeley, I better not hear you say anything. </p>

<p>

My response:</p>

<p>Great, call me when you get your Nobel Prize.

</p>

<p>I won’t. But I’m sure you can check in on the winners, and see what they think. </p>

<p>

As I said before, for the umpteenth time, it doesn’t matter where you go to college. Therefore, it can be said of all colleges and universities that it is no big deal going to one college vs. another college.

</p>

<p>See above. So I don’t want to hear you saying how Berkeley is an exceptional school, because now you are saying that Berkeley is no better than any other school. </p>

<p>

Harvard is not at all competitive with schools like UC Berkeley, Caltech, or University of Chicago when it come to running and managing the major national science laboratories like JPL, Los Alamos, SLAC, Argonne, etc. But I hear that Harvard does have the Kennedy School of Government for aspiring politicians. Seems to me that the U.S. Government doesn’t let the Harvard types play with the expensive toys with moving parts.

</p>

<p>And by the same token, Berkeley is not at all competitive at dealing with Mass General, Brighan & Women’s, the New England Medical Center, and all of the medical-related pies that Harvard has fingers in. </p>

<p>

Everybody has a right to disagree without being called dumb by someone like you? Don’t they?

</p>

<p>Did I say that they were dumb? Please point to the quote where I specifically said that they were dumb. Oh, can’t do it, can you? So stop making stuff up. </p>

<p>

And finally, Sakky once again, you really have to get over this Harvard thing. In the real world. You know, that big open space on the other side of your door? When it comes down to practicing law, medicine, accounting, business, etc. Nobody cares where you went to school. The person with the best skills who performs their job with the most success wins. Stop worrying about the name of the school that a person goes to. It is not important. Really, it’s no big deal going to Harvard. Get over it.

</p>

<p>So are you saying that all of the people here on this thread who would prefer to go to Harvard rather than Berkeley need to get over it? Don’t be shy. Just come right out and tell people like gentlemenscholar and UCLAri that they are wrong.</p>

[d-a-d]

<p>"Then why do all my friends in law school, med school, and B-school complain that their friends at Harvard, Yale, Stanford, etc. get all the breaks? Going to Harvard Law, even according to many law professors, helps QUITE a bit.</p>

<p>But this still has NOTHING to do with undergrad education."</p>

<p>Well, that’s what life experience is all about. You learn how things work after you get a chance to do things in real time in the real world. Give it 20 or 30 years and you’ll see what I mean. People buy into a lot of myths and it is very hard to convince them that a myth is not true. Particularly when they have invested a lot of time, effort, and ego invested in that myth. </p>

<p>If I had a dime for every time someone told me that someone else is getting all the breaks; I would be a gazillionaire. You make your own breaks regardless of where you went to college. Or for that matter even if you went to college. You’ll see.</p>

<p>If you are one of the best at whichever profession you choose, you work hard, and prove your worth you will be rewarded regardless of where you went to school.</p>

[sakky]

<p>

People buy into a lot of myths and it is very hard to convince them that a myth is not true. Particularly when they have invested a lot of time, effort, and ego invested in that myth.

</p>

<p>This is not a myth. The fact is, Harvard will increase your chances of success. Just like going to Berkeley will increase your chances of success over, say, going to UCRiverside. </p>

<p>After all, ask yourself, why are people fighting over spots in Berkeley, if schools don’t really matter. Why should all these California high school students even care about trying to write a perfect essay, doing well on the SAT, getting good high school grades, doing all kinds of EC’s, all with the goal of getting into Berkeley in mind, if the quality of the school really doesn’t matter. Why not just kick back and take it easy in high school, and just go to a community college? After all, if some colleges aren’t better than others, then why should anybody strive so hard to get into a top college?</p>

[d-a-d]

<p>Sakky:</p>

<p>There you go again. You are not stating the facts.</p>

<p>You wrote:</p>

<p>“And by the same token, Berkeley is not at all competitive at dealing with Mass General, Brigham & Women’s, the New EnglandMedical Center; and all of the medical related pies Harvard has fingers in.”</p>

<p>My response:</p>

<p>Wow. Thanks for bringing this up. Harvard is even less competitive in this area than UC Berkeley and the UC system. Are you kidding? When it comes to medicine and bioscience, UC Berkeley is located in the epicenter of bioscience. Northern California is biotech central. Harvard could only wish it had the resources in the area of biotech that UCSF and UC Berkeley have. </p>

<p>It seems that you have never been out to beautiful California. One of the foremeost medical research centers in the world is the University of California at San Francisco, which is linked to UC Berkeley. However, since you want to start talking about all medical related research. The UC system, of which Berkeley is a part, also has UCLA, UC Irvine, UC San Diego, and UC Davis Med. Schools. Not to mention all of the new Bioengineering and BioMedical buildings being built on UC Campuses. </p>

<p>Here’s some more facts for you:</p>

<p><a href=“http://wwwbio.org/events/2004/media/sfbioasp[/url]”>http://wwwbio.org/events/2004/media/sfbioasp&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

<p>Northern California is the home of 5 major research universities. UC Berkeley, UC Davis, UC Santa Cruz, UC San Francisco, and Stanford. More bioscience companies are located in Northern California than anywhere else.</p>

<p>The UCSF Mission Bay project in San Francisco:</p>

<p><a href=“http://pub.ucsf.edu/missionbay/history/biotech.php[/url]”>http://pub.ucsf.edu/missionbay/history/biotech.php&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

<p>is huge. They do not have anything like this at Harvard. </p>

<p>Do we need to go on here? Because I think you are watching the Harvard myth implode before your eyes.</p>

[sakky]

<p>

There you go again. You are not stating the facts.

</p>

<p>Oh, and you are? </p>

<p>

Wow. Thanks for bringing this up. Harvard is even less competitive in this area than UC Berkeley and the UC system. Are you kidding? When it comes to medicine and bioscience, UC Berkeley is located in the epicenter of bioscience. Northern California is biotech central. Harvard could only wish it had the resources in the area of biotech that UCSF and UC Berkeley have

</p>

<p>Oh really? Is that a fact. Trust me, Harvard Medical School is not impressed by what you said. HMS can wipe the floor with UCSF. </p>

<p>

Northern California is the home of 5 major research universities. UC Berkeley, UC Davis, UC Santa Cruz, UC San Francisco, and Stanford. More bioscience companies are located in Northern California than anywhere else.</p>

<p>The UCSF Mission Bay project in San Francisco:</p>

<p><a href=“http://pub.ucsf.edu/missionbay/history/biotech.php[/url]”>http://pub.ucsf.edu/missionbay/history/biotech.php&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

<p>is huge. They do not have anything like this at Harvard. </p>

<p>Do we need to go on here? Because I think you are watching the Harvard myth implode before your eyes.

</p>

<p>And there you go again, citing other schools to support Berkeley. And what exactly do UCSF, Stanford, and those other schools have to do with Berkeley? UCSF’s and Stanford’s top-ranked medical schools don’t exactly help out Berkeley very much.</p>

<p>And that’s what we’re talking about - Harvard vs. Berkeley. Not Harvard vs. a whole bunch of random schools in the Bay Area. Stick to the topic. I am not invoking MIT when I’m talking about Harvard (although I easily could, considering the cheek-to-jowl relationship between Harvard and MIT). So why are you invoking other schools?</p>

[sakky]

<p>

First, thanks for the MIT/Harvard clarification. I wasn’t aware that you could do that, which does make me change my mind about MIT a bit. But I also want to clarify what I mean when I say “broad” area of studies. I don’t just mean that you have more options about what you want to major in. I mean that if you are a eecs major but you have a soft spot for, say, russian lit, you can take a class on Nabokov’s early novels taught by the very person who translated the latest Norton anthology (just an example). Not that I’m completely agreeing with you about the challenges of switching majors, but even if that was the case and you just want to dabble in something else, you can use your electives to explore all kinds of other programs, most of which are extremely strong. For example, I’m an english major but I enjoy american history and political science, so I can take classes in those programs when I see a class that looks good or hear about some amazing prof

</p>

<p>I agree that you can dabble around without necessarily majoring in a particular field. On the other hand, because of the highly liberal cross-reg policy, MIT students can dabble around too, just by taking classes at Harvard. So from this standpoint, it’s a wash. Like I said, in some cases, just from a travel standpoint, it is actually easier for an MIT student to get to a Harvard class than to an MIT class.</p>

[UCLAri]

<p>d-a-d,</p>

<p>Sorry, but as an applicant to grad school, I KNOW that having a Harvard BA would’ve helped. Hell, I was even told that my intuition was right by a couple of admissions people. And if getting the better MA helps me get the better job, then yes, Harvard matters.</p>

<p>What you’re saying is very true, however. We make our own breaks. I don’t disagree at all. However, to say that having a Harvard diploma won’t HELP you along the way is simply silly. As my friend, who is a 2L at Boalt, said:</p>

<p>“It’s not like I’m relegated to some internship with Timbuktu’s law offices. However, I know that going in, the Stanford and Harvard 2Ls are going to have an edge on me, despite the fact that I may be the better applicant. That’s life.”</p>

<p>And if you look at stats for med students, Harvard is more successful at getting people their first-choice residency than UCLA. And UCLA isn’t some no-name med school, either.</p>

<p>Yes, Harvard matters.</p>

<p>But, I just used two graduate school examples, so here are some good undergrad examples:</p>

<p>I did an internship in Washington, DC last year. My first choice was Brookings, second CSIS, third Wilson. Guess what? All the spots got snatched up by Harvard, Princeton, and Yale undergrads. I met some of them, and you know what? I was probably just as well-equipped to serve any of the tanks. I couldn’t help but wonder, therefore, if the Harvard name helped. I talked to some people at Brookings, and you know what they all said?</p>

<p>“Well, yeah…”</p>

<p>Sorry d-a-d, but the Harvard name is not only a leg up for getting into good grad schools, but for getting good internships, good connections, and good pedigree.</p>

[d-a-d]

<p>Sakky:</p>

<p>Now you are starting to lose your temper. That’s not a very Harvard thing to do.</p>

<p>You wrote:</p>

<p>“Trust me, Harvard Medical School is not impressed by what you said. HMS can wipe the flor with UCSF”</p>

<p>My response:</p>

<p>LOL. So now you are a spokeperson for Harvard Medical School? Is that the official position of Harvard Medical School? That they can wipe the floor with UCSF. That’s not too nice. I’m sure the folks at Harvard Med School are plenty impressed by what is going on in Northern California. We also have a few small biotech companies out here like Genentech that are kind of good at what they do. </p>

<p>You wrote:</p>

<p>“Citing other schools to support Berkeley.”</p>

<p>My response:</p>

<p>UCSF is affiliated with UC Berkeley. All UC Med Schools are part of the UC system of which UC Berkeley is a part. See, that’s what you don’t understand here. When you start comparing UC Berkeley with Harvard, you are comparing the whole UC system with Harvard because it is an integrated system. Harvard is simply no match for all of the resources in the UC system. You might say that’s ot fair. But as you said before Sakky, “It doesn’t matter where an advantage comes from, it just matters that the advantage exists.”</p>

<p>And, if you want to expand on the “part of an integrated system” argument, UC Berkeley is part of the State of California and I am quite certain that Harvard doesn’t have more resources than the State of California. </p>

<p>Case closed.</p>

[UCLAri]

<p>d-a-d,</p>

<p>You still haven’t managed to show how Cal undergrad gives the same opportunity as Harvard undergrad.</p>

<p>Why are Harvard students getting into better law schools in higher numbers, if Cal is equal?</p>

[sakky]

<p>

Now you are starting to lose your temper. That’s not a very Harvard thing to do.

</p>

<p>No, you are starting to lose your common sense. I would say that that’s not a very Berkeley thing to do (or maybe it is). </p>

<p>

LOL. So now you are a spokeperson for Harvard Medical School? Is that the official position of Harvard Medical School? That they can wipe the floor with UCSF. That’s not too nice. I’m sure the folks at Harvard Med School are plenty impressed by what is going on in Northern California. We also have a few small biotech companies out here like Genentech that are kind of good at what they do.

</p>

<p>And conversely, there are some not-bad biotechs like Biogen located in the Boston area that seem to be doing OK for themselves. </p>

<p>But again, what does that matter? What does Genentech have to do with Berkeley? </p>

<p>

UCSF is affiliated with UC Berkeley.

</p>

<p>Oh really? Then why not just call it UCBerkeley Medical School? After all, UCLA has UCLA Medical School, UCSD has UCSD Medical School. So if UCSF really is affiliated with Berkeley, then why not just call it UCBerkeley medical school? </p>

<p>

When you start comparing UC Berkeley with Harvard, you are comparing the whole UC system with Harvard because it is an integrated system. Harvard is simply no match for all of the resources in the UC system. You might say that’s ot fair. But as you said before Sakky, “It doesn’t matter where an advantage comes from, it just matters that the advantage exists.”</p>

<p>And, if you want to expand on the “part of an integrated system” argument, UC Berkeley is part of the State of California and I am quite certain that Harvard doesn’t have more resources than the State of California. </p>

<p>Case closed.

</p>

<p>Oh really? So now you have to invoke the entire University of California system to support your argument? Can’t rely on Berkeley by itself, can you? That just goes to demonstrate the weakness of your argument. You couldn’t prove your case with Berkeley, so you have to go running to the parent organization.</p>

[d-a-d]

<p>UCLAri:</p>

<p>So what? Are you going to give up on your career goals because of this. I certainly hope not. Everybody, no matter where they have gone to school, has experienced rejection, that is part of life and school. You are the one who makes your breaks in life. You have an excellent education from UCLA and your friend is getting an excellent legal education at Boalt. You both have the skills and abilities to overcome any obstacles before you and succeed. Don’t worry about where the other guy went to school, or that you got rejected for this or that; figure out how you are going to achieve your objective and achieve it. The type of problems you are talking about are three dimensional; do not apply linear solutions to them.</p>

[UCLAri]

<p>d-a-d,</p>

<p>No, of course I’m not going to just give up. And I know I have a great education from UCLA.</p>

<p>But, I’d sure love to have that Harvard edge when it comes time to move on to my PhD. Look, you keep saying name doesn’t matter. But, like sakky said, “Is Berkeley not better than Cal State SF?” When you look at CVs of most top PhD programs’ students, you see lots of Harvard, Yale, Princeton, and Stanford undergrads. It’s something even my profs recognized when I looked to go for my PhD. It’s real, d-a-d, and it matters.</p>

[d-a-d]

<p>Saaky,</p>

<p>Well, this is interesting. </p>

<p>I can see that we can go on here all night and all day. This kind of reminds me of my cat when it chases it’s tail; it goes round and round in a big old circle, gets tired, and then looks up at me as if to say; that was stupid, I didn’t accomplish anything.</p>

<p>So, my cat and I say “Goodnight Sakky, sweet dreams”.</p>

[sakky]

<p>

This kind of reminds me of my cat when it chases it’s tail; it goes round and round in a big old circle, gets tired, and then looks up at me as if to say; that was stupid, I didn’t accomplish anything.

</p>

<p>I agree that I find your arguments highly frustrating. First you say that Berkeley is a great school, then you assert that school quality doesn’t really matter. Hmm…</p>

[d-a-d]

<p>sakky:</p>

<p>You are a cheap shot artist. Somebody says they are going away, tries to be nice to you, and when they turn their back, you take a cheap shot. </p>

<p>You have little or no idea what you are talking with respect to UC Berkeley, UC in general, or California. Based upon your observations and responses you have little or no real world experience other, than it appears, writing thousands of ad naseum postings on CC.</p>

<p>In one of your postings you appear to speak for Harvard. Do you work for Harvard? If so, is your job for Harvard? Posting thousands of messages on CC?</p>

[UCLAri]

<p>d-a-d,</p>

<p>I have to say that with my experience with sakky’s posts, he’s actually more than willing to give Berkeley credit where it’s due. And, based on what I know about his credentials, they’re quite good.</p>

<p>But, here’s the thing: great educations matter. They are not the only key to success, but all you need to do is look at the alma maters of senators and Presidents to know that the big names still count. Sure, there are exceptions, but Harvard certainly has an edge.</p>

[Delicatess]

<p>Fair enough that Harvard’s medical school is top along with JH’s, but uh UCSF’s is in the top 4, so it’s not exactly garbage.</p>

[d-a-d]

<p>UCLAri:</p>

<p>I understand where you are coming from. </p>

<p>However, if you look at the resumes of America’s leaders; top attorneys, doctors, politicians, engineers, etc. you will be surprised to find out that the vast majority of these people did not attend IVY league schools. When you start getting into the ranks of successful entrepreneurs you will find it thinly populated with IVY league grads. I don’t think the IVY league mindset lends itself to entrepreneurship. The point I have been trying to make; using UC Berkeley as an example (BTW, I did not attend or graduate from UC Berkeley) is that in the real world, success is a function of the combination of raw skill, talent, street smarts, and education. Book smarts do not equal street smarts and vice versa. However, you need a good combination of the two to succeed. While a degree from this school or that school may get you into a specific door; it won’t help you once you are in. Also, in today’s entrepreneurial environment, street smarts combined with book smarts are the name of the game with a heavier weighting on street smarts. </p>

<p>I do some business in Asia. Many of the people with the big money either do not have a college degree or went to some college that neither you nor I have never heard of. Some have degrees from US colleges or universities (even a few IVYS). The point being, when you do a deal; the product, service, or specific skill set you bring to the table plus your personality and people skills is what makes the deal; not where you went to school. In business, money is the name of the game and if I can make someone money they don’t care where I went to school. Fancy titles and degrees might get you a nice government job in Washington if you are “wired” but they make zero difference in the entrepreneurial world. I’ve seen “IVY league” lawyers and MBAs from firms groveling at the feet of businessmen who never went to college or, in some cases, high school in order to get business. Not a pretty sight.</p>

<p>Granted, in certain circles, a Harvard degree carries a lot of weight. For instance; you mentioned that you were interested in internships that were snatched up by Princeton, Harvard, or Yale grads. O.K., so in the spheres of influence that determine who gets those internships a person with a Harvard degree is “wired”. I know of some law firms where a person with a degree from Boalt is wired. Or another firm where a person with a law degree from Stanford is wired. Or another firm where a law degree from USF is wired. Doesn’t mean they will get the job; just means they have an edge at that firm. All great paying firms doing exciting things. The upshot is that you said you eventually got an internship. So, you did, at some level, get in the door. That was your opportunity to prove yourself. If the people you are working with respect you and your skills you’ll move up the ladder. Believe me, with a degree from UCLA, you have the ticket to get your foot in the door in your chosen field. Where you go, once you are in the door, is up to you. </p>

<p>BTW, most POTUS, Senators, and Congressmen are or were not IVY leaguers. Check it out. Since you are from California check out the California Congressional delegation.</p>

<p>I know when I went to college and law school things were different. However, they were not that much different. You and your buddy at Boalt have earned world class educations and when you put some street smarts together with your educations (you have already started to do that) you can write your own tickets. It’s up to you. Don’t worry about the IVY Leaguers, they have their own problems. They lose more than their share of job offers. I’ve seen a lot of IVY leaguers get TDd for good jobs that were given to grads from some of the California schools we have discussed. So don’t think an IVY league diploma is an automatic pass key to jobs or opportunities. It isn’t.</p>

<p>As far as an IVY League degree making your life easier and giving you an advantage. Maybe. Maybe not. It all depends on the situation. I know a lot of IVY leaguers who couldn’t scrape up the down payment on a cheap condo (in California) or are buried in debt to maintain their “lifestyle”.</p>

[UCLAri]

<p>d-a-d,</p>

<p>First off, I LIVE in Asia. The name Harvard and Yale are big deals here in Japan. Not everyone has heard of UCLA or Berkeley. But EVERYONE has heard of Harvard. And I’ve lived in four different cities in Japan, so believe me, I have some experience. And you find me a famous Japanese businessman without a degree, and I’ll buy you the Brooklyn Bridge. The only one in the 20th century that I can think of is Soichiro Honda.</p>

<p>In Japan, more than the US, your degree determines your life. Todai, Kyodai, Waseda, Keio. That’s it. Those are the only names that truly matter. </p>

<p>And if you want to get into the big New York law firms, that Ivy education matters. Unless every lawyer I know is yankin’ my chain. Maybe you have your hands on some secret that all these attorneys don’t. </p>

<p>If it’s not a majority of senators that are Ivy League grads (it’s Ivy, not IVY, BTW. It’s not an acronym) then it’s easily a plurality. I remember when I worked in Washington doing a pass through the Congressional Yellow Pages, and at least 40 senators had some Ivy Leage education.</p>

<p>And of course most California Congresspeople aren’t Ivy grads. But that’s not the big league. The big league is the Fed.</p>

<p>d-a-d, I don’t know what to tell you. You seem to have the belief that a Harvard education is meaningless. Along with sakky, I’m telling you that it has meaning. You point at all the successful people without the top educations. That’s great. But when I look at the CVs of students at top PhD programs, and almost 90% of them were Ivy undergrads, I can’t help but wonder if you’re just a bit silly. And believe me, PhD programs are where name matters more than even law or medicine.</p>