- UID
- 538603
- 在线时间
- 小时
- 注册时间
- 2010-6-8
- 最后登录
- 1970-1-1
- 主题
- 帖子
- 性别
- 保密
|
To zxyaa, yes I have researched into linkedin previously, you are correct in terms of the 2009 placement. That's why it's not strong compared to Berkeley, it's expected though.
As far as ranking goes, Cornell/Chicago/Columbia/UCLA -- it's hard to rank them because this sort of program has not formalized in such a way that is very easy to rank, plus a lot of programs are new. There is no true independent ranking out there -- gd is very outdated, quantnet is a brauch marketing tool, at was in 2008.
To alfredyuan, yes, 30% is the Berkeley rate, however, as you might notice, the spread in terms the number of applicants over the 10 years is pretty high, a couple years back, there was more than 400, this year it's down to reasonable 300.
As far as UCLA goes: 1, I think you mean a final project? and for the finance phD, the admission rate for that is extremely low, besides, on average, only one student per year will go back to do a phD in finance. 2, yes, Berkeley definitely has stricter requirement, so I assume you finish the first interview and waiting on the 2nd one. 3, true, the finance faculty@UCLA is very good, on par with Berkeley.
I have to disagree on the brand name -- UCLA and Berkeley is not the same, (almost) depends on your scale of the almost. e.g. UCLA math ranking increased recently due to Tao, engineering wise it can't compared to Berkeley. All my friends from Berkeley, MIT, standford, princton, harvard, Columbia, Cornell consider UCLA a step down in terms of the brand, a lot of them did undergrad in one of these very top schools and phD in the other ones, e.g. Berkeley undergrad, MIT grad, MIT undergrad, princeton grad, etc. |
|