|By Jastern05 (Jastern05) on Wednesday, March 24, 2004 - 01:08 am: Edit|
If you were to rank them, what order would you put them in. The UC's by themself....The CSU's by themself...Then both mixed together....
|By Coureur (Coureur) on Wednesday, March 24, 2004 - 01:19 am: Edit|
You are talking about over 30 schools. I doubt that anyone not employed by US News has devised their own ranking of that many colleges.
|By Deferreddude (Deferreddude) on Wednesday, March 24, 2004 - 02:22 am: Edit|
CSUs ain't worth ranking. There are too many of them and they are all about the same level.
*insert rest here*
|By Carolyn (Carolyn) on Wednesday, March 24, 2004 - 02:06 pm: Edit|
Here's my list for the top Cal States - I see VAST differences between the schools:
Cal Poly SLO
San Diego State University
Cal STate Long BEach
Cal State Fullerton
Cal STate San Francisco
Cal Poly Pomona
Cal STate Chico
Cal State San Jose
Cal STate Humboldt
Cal STate Monterey Bay
Cal State Sonoma
Ov course, this is just subjective opinion. The cal states are not as bad as everyone makes them out to be - they are more focused on undergraduate education than most of the UC's and it is VERY possible to get a great education at one of the cal states that is not all that different than what you'd get at most of the UC's. Unfortunately, the UC's get most of the press and thus most of the prestige.
By the way, I talked with a student at Cal Poly SLO yesterday. He said while it might be great for engineering and other technical fields the liberal arts get short-shifted. He's a history major and said just trying to get into classes to do his GE requirements has been a challenge.
|By Shitakirimusume (Shitakirimusume) on Wednesday, March 24, 2004 - 02:15 pm: Edit|
This is the current rankings.
|By Racer0317 (Racer0317) on Wednesday, March 24, 2004 - 03:04 pm: Edit|
UCLA - UC Berkley (Tied)
UCSB - UC DAVIS (Tied)
The best CAL state school is definitely Cal Poly SLO. (For engineering of course)
|By Deferreddude (Deferreddude) on Wednesday, March 24, 2004 - 03:24 pm: Edit|
UCLA is vastly inferior to Berkeley. I'm saying this as an objective person who got accpted to MIT and Dartmouth and who has no intention whatsover of going to the UCs. But yeah, Berkeley is MUCH MUCH MUCH^999999999 better.
|By Britbrat8604 (Britbrat8604) on Wednesday, March 24, 2004 - 03:38 pm: Edit|
ah yah, exactly what the deffered kid said
|By Omey (Omey) on Wednesday, March 24, 2004 - 05:07 pm: Edit|
UCB - UCLA
Why do all of you put UCSC so low? Do you know anything about it?
|By Savedbythebell7 (Savedbythebell7) on Wednesday, March 24, 2004 - 05:41 pm: Edit|
I know you guys will probably yell at me for ranking both the CSU's and UC's..and putting a few CSU's ahead of some UC's...but here is my subjective ranking, even though it really depends on the major at each school.
3.Cal Poly SLO
5.San Diego State
8.CSU Long Beach
9.Cal State Fullerton
10.Cal STate San Francisco
11. Cal Poly Pomona
11. Cal State Chico
11. Cal State San Jose
12. Cal STate Humboldt
13. Cal STate Monterey Bay
13. Cal State Sonoma
|By Lilskeetums17 (Lilskeetums17) on Wednesday, March 24, 2004 - 08:25 pm: Edit|
|By Savedbythebell7 (Savedbythebell7) on Wednesday, March 24, 2004 - 09:18 pm: Edit|
UCSC is a good school. Don't pay any attention to lilskeetums.
|By Carolyn (Carolyn) on Wednesday, March 24, 2004 - 10:14 pm: Edit|
But I would agree with you Saved that SDSU should probably be ranked about the same as UCR or UCSC.
|By Kluge (Kluge) on Wednesday, March 24, 2004 - 10:38 pm: Edit|
The thing that concerns me about SDSU is the horrible graduation rate - 9% in 4 years, 45% (about) over 6 years - way below the rates for UCR & UCSC. Why do you suppose that is? And why do you rank it as high as you do?
|By Savedbythebell7 (Savedbythebell7) on Wednesday, March 24, 2004 - 10:45 pm: Edit|
Well look at how much the incoming freshmen class has improved "statistically" since 1999. Basically those stats are indicative of less competitive classes entering SDSU. However, i've noticed an improvement in the averages of students entering the school. So perhaps, my year will have a much better graduation rate, I can *almost* guarantee it.
|By Savedbythebell7 (Savedbythebell7) on Wednesday, March 24, 2004 - 10:51 pm: Edit|
On a sidenote:
Many of my friends that got into UCR, got rejected by SDSU this year. Which clearly doesn't mean that SDSU is a better school, I just think that SDSU became much more competitive. Also like 3/4 of the kids from my school that are headed down there have completed Calculus and you'll find they have excellent marks. I've noticed, statistically speaking i'm probably one of the worse in the pack, if this is any indication of the incoming class of 08' SDSU seems very promising.
|By Tigerstyle (Tigerstyle) on Thursday, March 25, 2004 - 12:24 am: Edit|
so is UCSB the best 2nd tier UC? I got into ucsb and uci and i prefer uci... isn't it supposed to be great medical?
|By Karen415 (Karen415) on Thursday, March 25, 2004 - 12:42 am: Edit|
According to uc news it's
go to www.usnews.com and you'll find it there. but also, rankings are highly subjective and i wouldnt pay too muc attention to them. oh, and acceptance rates don't say much either because sdsu accepts a lot of kids knowing that a lot of them wont acutally go there.
|By Karen415 (Karen415) on Thursday, March 25, 2004 - 12:43 am: Edit|
oh sorry, that's "us" news, not uc... lol
|By Savedbythebell7 (Savedbythebell7) on Thursday, March 25, 2004 - 01:12 am: Edit|
US news, is a joke... I mean it holds SOME validity, but not much in my OWN opinion.
|By Thedad (Thedad) on Thursday, March 25, 2004 - 01:25 am: Edit|
A small indicator for the cognicenti: four UC's are members of the American Association of Universities (you don't join, you're invited). UCB, UCLA, UCSD, and UCSB. *Overall*, UCSB is a stronger campus than either UCD or UCI. UCSB is the most underrated UC, probably due to the party school rep.
|By Anxious_Mom (Anxious_Mom) on Thursday, March 25, 2004 - 01:53 am: Edit|
As a UCSB alum, perhaps you may be a tad bit biased
Actually, Davis and Irvine also are members (see the membership roster of AAU). (you do mean the Association of American Universities?)
Personally, I think the rating of most underrated UC goes to UCD.
|By Savedbythebell7 (Savedbythebell7) on Thursday, March 25, 2004 - 02:27 am: Edit|
They're equal... see my rankings...better than US news....no money involved and i'm not biased except for SDSU. Can't we all be equals here.
|By Botheredone (Botheredone) on Thursday, March 25, 2004 - 02:53 am: Edit|
Yeah the 4 most competitive UC's are as follows:
In that order. That's from school information not out of my ass. Why do you guys think so highly of UCSB? BTW the rankings are on numbers, how many people apply and how impacted the program is. Also, UCB has been rated number one public school in the nation by several venues.
|By Anxious_Mom (Anxious_Mom) on Thursday, March 25, 2004 - 02:54 am: Edit|
Compare latest research funding statistics:
UC Davis: $426.3 million versus UC Santa Barbara: $143.9 million
"UC Davis research funding hit a record of $426.3 million in 2002-03 -- marking an increase of $69 million (almost 20 percent) over the previous year and the 10th consecutive year that totals have risen.
In terms of research funding, UC Davis now ranks 16th among public universities, according to the National Research Council, and 11th according to U.S. News and World Report.
Also, the university is third in non-federally financed research expenditure and 15th in overall research expenditure, according to the National Science Foundation."
UC Santa Barbara:
"Continuing an eight-year trend, research support from external sources established a new record high at UC Santa Barbara this past year when a total of $143.9 million was received from federal and state agencies, corporations, and foundations."
Top institutions receive top dollars...
|By Shitakirimusume (Shitakirimusume) on Thursday, March 25, 2004 - 02:56 am: Edit|
I think UC's in Socal are getting better than UC's in Norcal. (Due to population growoth and
Ranking should be
1. UCB (declining lack of leadership from the top)
1. UCLA (In my opinon it is better than UCB right now.)
3. UCSD(Very strong in science)
4. UCI(Orange County economy pushing this
4. UCSB (Party school but very strong in Physics. It should be in top 5 in the nation.)
6. UCD (Declining. Check the acceptance Rate
7. UCR (used to be called UC Rejects. Now
it's getting much better. Has 7 year MD/BS program)
7. UCSC (Strong in Some areas but declining over all)
|By Savedbythebell7 (Savedbythebell7) on Thursday, March 25, 2004 - 02:58 am: Edit|
and we're off to the races.....
|By Jon (Jon) on Thursday, March 25, 2004 - 03:15 am: Edit|
|By Anxious_Mom (Anxious_Mom) on Thursday, March 25, 2004 - 03:49 am: Edit|
Yes, UC Davis is accepting more students. In 2000, as part of a UC wide plan to accommodate Tidal Wave II, UC Davis agreed to accept a much larger share of students and planned to quickly grow to become the largest UC within a few short years. To grow quickly, UCD continues to accept a larger number of students.
Other UCs, and especially UCB and UCLA, have a cap on enrollment, so their acceptance percentages continue to decline.
Even with the current problems with the state budget, UCD continues to hire faculty and staff, and is investing millions in projects to upgrade the infrastructure and facilities, building new labs, dorms, recreational facilities, etc at a quick pace to accommodate the increasing enrollment. Because there are way more qualified students than the UCs can accept right now, the GPAs and SAT scores are continuing to increase, even though more students are being accepted.
If any other college chose to suddenly increase enrollment, they would have to increase their acceptance %, right? So, the acceptance % should be viewed in light of the circumstances.
|By Aerin04 (Aerin04) on Thursday, March 25, 2004 - 11:09 am: Edit|
Okay, so ignoring UC's for a moment (which is a winless battle)...
I'm surprised people put Sonoma State at the bottom of their list of CSU's. Sonoma State actually has a very respectable academic reputation. It just isn't very well-known... it's tiny. I'd definitely rank it above Humboldt and Monteray Bay.
|By Carolyn (Carolyn) on Thursday, March 25, 2004 - 11:20 am: Edit|
I'm the one who did - but it wasn't at the bottom of all the cal states - just at the bottom of my list. I agree with you: Sonoma is definitely a great school, much smaller than most of the other cal states, good academics too.
|By Carolyn (Carolyn) on Thursday, March 25, 2004 - 11:40 am: Edit|
Yes, SDSU has a horrible graduation rate, but I'm not sure that's the only assessment of overall academic and faculty quality so much as it is a reflection of the fact that (1) the school is overcrowded and overenrolled so getting required classes completed in 4 years is a challenge (2) it's a huge school with little personal support. Students who aren't prepared well academically and aren't willing to be aggressive about getting help are simply not going to cut it at SDSU. On the other hand, SDSU's dismal grad rates should not be ignored by prospective students.
If we used 4 year graduation rates as the sole measure of academic quality, the "best" UC would actually be UCSB.
UCSB - 67% graduate in 4 years
UCB - 51%
UCSD - 50%
UCLA - 47%
UCSC - 41%
UCR - 39%
UCI - 37%
UC Davis - 32%
|By Thedad (Thedad) on Thursday, March 25, 2004 - 12:44 pm: Edit|
In addition to Physics, UCSB has a strong English department, a good engineering school (whose mortar was made from bones of students like me), and a strong Creative Studies program.
There's some other stuff that I'll have to see if I can post with attribution.
|By Kluge (Kluge) on Thursday, March 25, 2004 - 02:43 pm: Edit|
I would not consider any one criteria to be the sole arbiter of college quality. Graduation rate is significant to me, however. I understand that sub-50% 4 year rates are the norm, even at good schools, and 6 year rates at top public universities can be in the mid-80's. But a single-digit 4 year rate and a sub 50% 6 year rate indicates to me that either a lot of the students who attend aren't ready for college, or the school isn't prepared to deal with the student body effectively - whether academically or logistically. There can be a lot of reasons for that, but to me they all impact "quality." And the 4 and 6 year graduation rates do seem to be lower at the CSU's than at the UC's. All else being equal, I'd say a school with higher graduation rates should be "ranked" higher. Of course, all else is rarely equal. Different colleges have different strengths, and a given school can be perfect for one student and all wrong for another. Still, here's my combined "ranking" (in tiers where I don't think there's a significant difference:
Davis Irvine Santa Barbara Cal Poly SLO
Chico Long Beach Sonoma CP Pomona
My criteria? Ask me later...
|By Oops (Oops) on Thursday, March 25, 2004 - 03:22 pm: Edit|
Here're my 2 $/100's:
|By Karen415 (Karen415) on Thursday, March 25, 2004 - 04:31 pm: Edit|
Carolyn, where did you get your graduation statistics? According to the 2002 insiders guide to the colleges, it is:
i'm not trying to say that this is all you should be looking at, but, it's really weird that our statistics vary sooo much. that's why it's not good to look at ratings.
|By Anxious_Mom (Anxious_Mom) on Thursday, March 25, 2004 - 04:34 pm: Edit|
Carolyn, I'm curious where you got the 4 year graduation statistics? It would be interesting to see the 6 year.... My understanding is that these days the average for all but the highest ranked LACs is over 4 years.
From the most recent official Profile of UCD (2002), the average time to degree is 13 quarters, or just 1 quarter beyond the 4 years. Perhaps due to the large percentage of students that take double majors, or add minors?
"PERSISTENCE AND GRADUATION RATES
Davis undergraduates persist at rates among the highest for all UC students. Among freshmen entering from 1995 to 1999, 93 percent returned for
a fourth quarter and 87 percent for a seventh quarter.
Davis students also graduate at a very high rate. Among freshmen entering from 1987 to 1996, 79 percent completed a degree at Davis.
Most freshmen who complete a bachelor’s degree do so in just over four years; the average time to degree for freshmen entering UC Davis between
1992 and 1996 was 13 quarters."
We can split hairs about this or that statistic and the rankings, but all UCs have their strengths. In reality, all of the UCs are great schools and one cannot go wrong at any of them.
|By Dstark (Dstark) on Thursday, March 25, 2004 - 04:47 pm: Edit|
The four year rate for UCSB is incorect. That 67% is the five year rate. Should be 44%. Five year rates:
|By Omey (Omey) on Thursday, March 25, 2004 - 05:11 pm: Edit|
Seems like UCSC is not as good at all as UCSB. But why?
|By Kluge (Kluge) on Thursday, March 25, 2004 - 06:24 pm: Edit|
You can calculate the 4 and 6 year graduation rates from the data in the "common data set" which you can find by searching on the schools' website. The likely reason for the difference in graduation rates between the various UC's is simply selectivity: students with higher gpa's and test scores are more likely to complete their studies and graduate on time or shortly thereafter than those who score lower. I think if you were to chart out the gpa and SAT averages from each UC school along with the graduation rates you'd find the lines to be pretty parallel. To answer Omey's question, UCSB admissions have been more selective than UCSC's in the recent past, so I'd expect UCSB's graduation rate to be higher.
What doesn't follow that general rule is a comparison between San Diego State and UC Riverside. SDSU reports a student body with "stats" fairly similar to those of UCR, but the graduation rate differential is striking - 9% 4 year vs. 39%; 45% 6 yr. vs. 66%. I'm curious why this is, and would love any insight any of you might have.
Anxious Mom - I find the "average time to graduate" number to be less helpful than the % completing in X years. I don't know the methodology used to calculate the number and I find it to be confusing when compared to the other number. The % graduating in 4 or 6 years can be checked against the numbers in the common data set, so it's "apples to apples." But I think that it's true that the average time to graduate just about anywhere is over 4 years...
|By Anxious_Mom (Anxious_Mom) on Thursday, March 25, 2004 - 06:34 pm: Edit|
agreed - the point of mentioning the average time to graduate was that if most students are graduating in 13 quarters, that would, obviously, be reflected in a lower "graduation rate in 4 years" statistic.... however, if the graduation rate after 1 more quarter is good, then folks shouldn't worry so much about the 4yr statistic...
the 5 year rate shows a respectable %
|By Kielfitz (Kielfitz) on Thursday, March 25, 2004 - 07:54 pm: Edit|
Shita...whatever your name is, you say UCs in Northern California are falling yet you put Berkeley on the top of your list. But moreover, everyone, the UCs are heading downhill. The Governator is taking money from public education, more professors are leaving institutions such as UCLA to teach at private schools, like USC. The UCs are hurting as well are the Cal States, so I hope all of you can get a nice scholarship from a private school where you can have a more personalized education and have access to your professors.
|By Jakers (Jakers) on Tuesday, April 20, 2004 - 03:47 am: Edit|
I don't know why so many people seem to be ranking both UC Berkeley and UCLA as number one. According to the National Research Council UC Berkeley is ranked first in the amount of graduate programs in the top 10 (that's over Harvard, Stanford, and Yale, schools that UCLA could never compete with) with 35 of 36 programs in the top 10. UCLA has only 9 graduate programs out of 36 ranked in the top 10. The National Research Council also ranks first nationally in the number of “distinguished” programs for the scholarship of the faculty (32 programs). Secondly, UC Berkeley has produced more Nobel Prize winners than any other university in the nation except for the University of Chicago, and has discovered over 16 elements on the Periodic Table of Elements and is the only university in the world to have elements named after it (Berkelium and Californium). There is no “UCLAium”. Also, UC Berkeley's library collections are far superior to UCLA's. Berkeley has the largest library collection west of the Mississippi River with over 9 million volumes, and the fourth largest library collection on the continent. According to the Association of Research Libraries, Berkeley’s library collections are ranked 3rd in the nation, following the library collections at Harvard and Yale. If we compare the student bodies of the two schools, Berkeley currently has the 2nd largest amount of National Merit Scholars who attend its campus, and more Berkeley undergraduates go on to earn a Ph. D. than undergraduates from any other school in the nation. So with a more prestigious faculty, library, and student body than UCLA it should be obvious that being the oldest University of California, and the UC system flagship campus, UC Berkeley is far superior to any of the UC campuses. Also, as someone noted before, UC Berkeley is constantly ranked the number one public university in the nation by numerous sources. And on a side note, why does UCLA have to copy every thing UC Berkeley does? Get your own mascot, and your own fight song, be original. Sorry for the long polemic, but someone needs to be realistic. One should also compare some of the final exams of similar courses at Berkeley and UCLA, and one will see that Berkeley just expects more. UCLA will never share the same world class reputation that Berkeley has made for itself through its amazing faculty, academic accomplishments, and its historic protests and liberal atmosphere. Stick to basketball “Baby Berkeley” (UCLA)- You're way out of Berkeley's league!
|By Kluge (Kluge) on Tuesday, April 20, 2004 - 06:35 pm: Edit|
Four posts up I asked a question about the apparent inconsistency in the widely different graduation rates at SDSU and UCR, given the similarity in the profile of incoming freshmen. I think I've stumbled on a part of the answer, which I'll share.
Savedbythebell pointed in the right direction: it has to do with different data bases. The freshman profile is based on last year's average enrolled freshman (2003). Graduation rates reported in the most recent common data set (both 4 and 6 year) are based on the freshman class which enrolled in 1997. Apparently, SDSU adopted a competitive admissions policy in 1997, with the result that the average SDSU freshman's "stats" have gone from 3.18 gpa/983 SAT in 1998 to 2003's 3.52 gpa/1071 SAT average. (Average of admitted students for 2004 is 3.69/1129, but the average of those who actually enroll will probably be closer to 2003's) UCR's freshman profile has remained relatively static over the same period, at around 3.4/1060 from '97 through '03.
SDSU's internally tracked graduation rates through the incoming 1999 freshman class show a significant upward trend starting with the selectively admitted classes at the end of the decade, which seems to validate the premise that incoming students with higher high school gpa's and SAT scores will tend to graduate sooner and in higher percentages than those with lower academic stats. (OK, I know - duh!)
Whether there's more to the story than that we won't know until 2009. If nothing else, I guess it's an interesting window into the direction a college can take when it changes its philosophy (and how statistics can be misleading.)
|By Krdirect (Krdirect) on Wednesday, May 12, 2004 - 01:07 pm: Edit|
Does anyone know exactly how to calculate GPA for UC's? I've heard that freshman and senior year grades are not included. Not sure how many honors or AP's receive the additional point, and if it is 1 point per semester or 1 point per year.
Report an offensive message on this page E-mail this page to a friend
|Posting is currently disabled in this topic. Contact your discussion moderator for more information.|
|Administrator's Control Panel -- Board Moderators Only|