What's the difference between Californian universities?

[snoopy369]

Penn State is not a good example, unless we're talking football. UPenn is a top ten, Ivy League school (I think the only public member?). Ohio State is higher ranked than Ohio University, but not older (OU is 1804 vs. 1870); and neither is highly ranked (both are outside the top 50 in USN&WR) or respected except in limited fields.

In any event, he did say 'in general', not 'in every instance', and I think that is probably sufficient given what I know, at least.

[onodera]

How did California end up with 3 stellar universities, while Oregon and Washington both suck at having good ones?

[snoopy369]

California is really big.

[MRT144]

University of Washington is good. It's not Berkeley by any stretch of the imagination.

[MRT144]

Berkely

Why do you hate good universities?

[snoopy369]

Seriously, people outside of the US have no concept for some things. California has a population of around 37,000,000 people. That's more than half the population of France or the UK alone, and almost half that of Germany. It's well over 10% of the US' population. They also produce a good portion of the US' non-meat food...

Oregon and Washington combined have around 11,000,000 people. Hence California having more than 3 times as many good universities as the two combined... and of course the weather is better in California, which leads to bringing some better students there. I'm fairly sure this is why Cal Tech has come to be as good as MIT... all of the students who are really smart but also enjoy not freezing go to CT.

[Imran Siddiqui]

UPenn is a top ten, Ivy League school (I think the only public member?)

UPenn is Private.

[Dinner]

There's UCLA, UC Berkeley, Stanford and Caltech. I think UCLA is the generic one, but what's the difference between the other three?
Is Stanford like Harvard and Caltech like MIT? If it is so, what is Berkeley like?

First of all there is the California State University system which is supposed to do some original research but mostly they're educating schools rather than research schools and legally they're supposed to take in the top 50% of students who graduate from high schools in the state. Next we have the University of California system which is supposed to only take the top 10% to 15% of students and this system's primary job is to do original research in all fields though they also teach. Lastly you have a bunch of independent privately owned universities who aren't affiliated with the state and who do their own thing. This are the schools like Stanford, The University of Southern California (USC), The California Institute of Technology (CalTECH), etc...

Stanford is often considered the only Ivy league school on the west coast (while some more liberal people claim UC Berkley is also Ivy or at least "west coast ivy" what ever that means) while CalTECH is often considered one of the best engineering and materials science schools in the county.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Ivy League has a specific meaning. You can't say a a school is the "only Ivy League school on the West Coast". At best, "west coast ivy" may work (akin to "public ivy") - comparing the school to an Ivy League caliber.

[The Mad Monk]

Berkely

I will not dis any school with an element named after it.

[snoopy369]

UPenn is Private.

Ah, you're right.

[Dinner]

I'm not interested in which one is better, I want to know their differences. If UC are public universities, does this mean they don't charge their students?

These days, no. When my father was young it was practically free; meaning they did charge tuition but the state also gave you a "Cal Grant" and that cash grant was usually so large and generous that it paid for your tuition, books, and still left you a bit of cash on hand to live on. When I was in college in the mid 90's the combo of Pell Grants (federal student aid grants) and Cal Grants meant that tuition was still free and there was some money for books but you ended up having to pay for part of your books on your own but there was no longer enough money left on to live off of. Now with how bad the recession hit California and how massive the budget cuts are... Well... They've not only put big time tuition rate increases into effect but they've also slashed the Cal Grant system so now most students must pay to attend.

That's kind of sad because California was really the only state in the US who offered a truly free excellent university education to anyone and everyone who could "make satisfactory progress" (this usually meant keep at least a 3.0 and graduate on time). The times they are a changing though and this is no longer true.

[Dinner]

The UC and CSU system still offer a good value in higher education (state subsidized costs) but they are sadly no longer free. Of course, even back in the good old days it was only official California legal residents who got the good subsidies and cash grants and even US citizens from other states not only didn't get the cash grants but they also got charged out of state tuition which was about 300% more than the in state tuition.

[snoopy369]

I think you are a bit nearsighted with "the only state in the US". New Mexico, for one, has a very similar system; when the NM Lottery was enacted in the 90s, any student with a 2.5 and even remotely decent SAT/ACT scores could attend NMSU or UNM for free (tuition-free, anyway). That's still going strong, thanks to the fact that it's tied directly to the lottery (so not vulnerable to state budget cuts, generally, as it would require a separate act just to cut it - which would be hideously unpopular).

[Dinner]

I will not dis any school with an element named after it.

The state also has an element named after it too.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Berkelium

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Californium

Public support of scientific research.