2007 USNEWS Rankings!

College Search & Selection
641

<p>The_prestige, maybe I did not make myself clear. I like the WSJ concept. As such, I am:</p>

<p>1) Endorsing a system that would look at the number of students attending those top graduation schools vis a vis the size the size of their undergraduate institutions.</p>

<p>2) Only look at the top 10 programs in each field. </p>

<p>So, instead of merely looking at where the students at the top 5 MBA programs, Medical and Law schools come from, I am merely suggesting we have a study that details where the students at the tp 10 MBA programs, top 10 Medical and Law schools, top 10 Engineering programs, top 10 PhD programs in all the major disciplines and the top 10 other professional programs did their undergraduate studies. </p>

<p>Don't worry, Harvard, Princeton and Yale would still do swimmingly well, but at the same time, the gaps would be narrowed significantly among the elites and there would be a more accurate look at the placement sucess that undergraduate institutions truly have.</p>

642

<p>How about this?</p>

<ol>
<li>Harvard </li>
<li>Yale = Princeton, Stanford, MIT</li>
<li>Chicago, Columbia, Penn, Dartmouth</li>
<li>Brown = Duke, Cornell = JHU = Northwestern, Berkeley, Rice</li>
<li>UVA = Michigan, Emory, WUSTL, Georgetown, UCLA, USC...</li>
</ol>

<p>USC has a top 10 undegraduate business school (27% students), top 1 or 2 cinema & film production school & very respectful engineering program. The SAT requirement is about 20th nationally, more competitive than those of UC-Berkeley & UCLA. It is one of strongest Alumni networks worldwide, like Harvard and Notre Dame. No wonder that the national ranking has moved the most from 40+th to 27th in recent years. It may be soon that it could surpass UCLA (26th this year) & Berkely (21th).... Why is USC forgotten in those discussions?</p>

643

<p>“Now it seems that you've already agreed that Caltech is NOT a specialty school,”</p>

<p>-This is exactly what I don’t agree with. Caltech IS a specialty school. It has virtually no strong programs outside science and engineering. A school doesn’t get much more specialized than Caltech. </p>

<p>“It turns out however that the strength in many fields IS NOT A CRITERION in USNews national ranking. If you don't like the ranking, then create your own, but saying that Caltech's high position in the ranking list is not justified because it's a specialty school is simply ridiculous, since:
1. Caltech is not a specialty school.
2. USNews national ranking doesn't count department diversity as a criterion.”</p>

<p>I’m not talking about the US News rankings. I’m talking about how highly people rank Caltech on this forum. This is something I believe is done because it is familiar to people, not because they have put much thought into the situation. In fact, there is not much difference between Caltech and many other top universities if one uses US News as the indicator. Looking at Caltech and say Chicago, the only big differences between the two on US News lie within SAT scores, Freshmen in the top 10% of their high school class, and admissions percent – all things that have no bearing whatsoever on what I am arguing. </p>

<p>As for creating my own ranking, the_prestige has already created one that comes pretty close to what I believe. </p>

<p>“Now you are entering a dangerous zone. I don't think you haven't known that Caltech has the strongest student body in terms of academic accompishment and is always among the most selective colleges. It is arguably the most rigorous college in the US. It has one of the lowest faculty/student ratio, and it has the highest Nobel prize/population ratio in the States. In terms of faculty, student body and accomplishment, Caltech is definitely as good as HYPSM. So what are you complaining other than most Caltech grads ARE NOT INTERESTED to go to non-technical fields?”</p>

<p>Caltech does have students with very high SATs, in fact the highest. Does this change that the school is only strong in science and engineering? No. Faculty to student ratios, and Nobel Prize winners, etc has nothing to do with my argument that the school is ranked highly because of science and engineering only.</p>

644

<p>Anyone who wants highlight the absurdity of ranking colleges need do no more than point to this Caltech vs RISD argument.</p>

645

<p>
[quote]
-This is exactly what I don’t agree with. Caltech IS a specialty school. It has virtually no strong programs outside science and engineering. A school doesn’t get much more specialized than Caltech.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>How could Caltech be a specialty school if it is in WSJ feeder list, where you still have a huge list of 'well-rounded' colleges below it? You still haven't answered this question and talk around the issue.</p>

<p>
[quote]
I’m not talking about the US News rankings. I’m talking about how highly people rank Caltech on this forum. This is something I believe is done because it is familiar to people, not because they have put much thought into the situation. In fact, there is not much difference between Caltech and many other top universities if one uses US News as the indicator. Looking at Caltech and say Chicago, the only big differences between the two on US News lie within SAT scores, Freshmen in the top 10% of their high school class, and admissions percent – all things that have no bearing whatsoever on what I am arguing.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>To be fair, Caltech is ranked higher in this CC forum than in USNEWS in general. This shows that CC forum has actually many more 'people in the know; average people in the street have no idea what Caltech is, let alone familiar with it. Your argument just doesn't make sense here. Caltech is ranked/regarded highly in this forum primarily because its faculty and students are every bit as good as those at HYPSM. If that's not a basis to rank a university then what is a good basis to rank a school? The number of organized parties? The number of sport-stars? What if I claim that Cornell is just as good as UCSD or RPI, would you agree to this? Why not?</p>

<p>Whether you like it or not, most CC'ers would rank the colleges based on the perceived 'prestige'. The fact is that Caltech's prestige is associated with its formidable faculty and student body, which can only be matched by HYPSM.</p>

646

<p>harvard is still #1 in my book</p>

647

<p>“How could Caltech be a specialty school if it is in WSJ feeder list, where you still have a huge list of 'well-rounded' colleges below it? You still haven't answered this question and talk around the issue.”</p>

<p>I did indeed address this. In fact, I addressed it explicitly:</p>

<p>“Caltech had a class size of 249. Thus, having 7 people attend at least some of the top business, med, or law schools, put it on the list. This is merely a function of its size and student population. Caltech has many great students; it is not a shock that it appears on the list. But again, for a school that is supposed to be among HYPSM, it is 20 spots lower than they.”</p>

<p>“To be fair, Caltech is ranked higher in this CC forum than in USNEWS in general. This shows that CC forum has actually many more 'people in the know; average people in the street have no idea what Caltech is, let alone familiar with it.”</p>

<p>-Indeed there are a few people in the know on these boards, but the majority of those who come on are high school students who don’t know what they’re talking about. </p>

<p>“Your argument just doesn't make sense here. Caltech is ranked/regarded highly in this forum primarily because its faculty and students are every bit as good as those at HYPSM.”</p>

<p>No. Caltech is ranked highly on this forum because it’s a familiar thing to do. People aren’t ranking Caltech highly because they believe it has a renowned faculty or very strong student body, but because it has always been done. </p>

<p>“What if I claim that Cornell is just as good as UCSD or RPI, would you agree to this? Why not?”</p>

<p>What if I claim RISD deserved just as much of a high ranking as a national university as Caltech? Would you agree with this? Why not? :rolleyes:</p>

648

<p>
[quote]
Caltech is ranked/regarded highly in this forum primarily because its faculty and students are every bit as good as those at HYPSM.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>It's ranked/regarded highly on this forum because engineering, science, premed and business-oriented students are so prevalent here. Ever notice how little conversation revolves around Williams or Swarthmore by comparison?</p>

649

<p>My ranking:
1. Harvard, CalTech, Yale, Princeton, Stanford, MIT
2. Chicago, Columbia, Penn, Dartmouth, Brown, Duke, Cornell, JHU, Northwestern, Berkeley, Rice.
3. UVA, Michigan, Emory, WUSTL, Georgetown, UCLA, USC...</p>

<p>USC has a top 10 undegraduate business school (27% students), top 1 or 2 cinema & film production school & very respectful engineering program. The SAT requirement is about 20th nationally, more competitive than those of UC-Berkeley & UCLA. It is one of strongest Alumni networks worldwide, like Harvard and Notre Dame. No wonder that the national ranking has moved the most from 40+th to 27th in recent years. It may be soon that it could surpass UCLA (26th this year) & Berkely (21th).... Why is USC forgotten in those discussions?</p>

650

<p>Isn't Berkeley like number 3 or something? I would think Berkeley is a wayyy better school then some of the other schools that beat it.</p>

651

<p>per sakky, berkeley is one of best schools in the world for PhDs, but not much so for undergraduate program :rolleyes:</p>

652

<p>The USNEWS ranking is the worse ranking i've ever seen!!!i can't agree with princeton beeing first...Harvard ,stanford...Stanford is better overall than princeton .</p>

653

<p>agree, actually this is way proper ranking
1) Harvard
2) Stanford
3) Yale-Princeton-MIT-Caltech-Berkeley
4) Penn-Columbia-Darty-Brown-Cornell-Chicago- U of Mich
5) JHU - Duke - Northwestern -WUStL- UCLA
6) meh, whatever</p>

654

<p>^Yup Stanford's definitely better than Princeton and Yale :D</p>

655

<p>^That is not a proper way of ranking...Duke should be in 4) ... its as good or better than Penn, Columbia, Dartmouth, Brown in every relevant category...way better than U of Mich and to a lesser degree Cornell</p>

<p>Should I start spitting out facts?</p>

656

<p>Ah, could you get back to discussing CalTech? I heard a few dozen Nobel laureates, Presidential Science Whatever Medal winners, and NASA go-to guys are huddled around a computer monitor in Pasadena waiting to find out whether or not the school they teach at is really just a glorified community college.</p>

657

<p>Nope, more like a glorified engineering college. :rolleyes:</p>

658

<p>Brown and Cornell, I think, should be in 5. And Duke should go up to 4....and I have doubts about WUSTL being in 5...should be lower.</p>

659

<p>If you are talking about Berkely undergrad, then it should feel very lucky to be on 5....but if you are talking about graduate, then it should be on 1 with Harvard....seriously....Berkely graduate programs' strength really scare me. </p>

<p>Also, shouldn't U Mich be on same level with UCLA?</p>

660

<p>
[quote]
“Caltech had a class size of 249. Thus, having 7 people attend at least some of the top business, med, or law schools, put it on the list. This is merely a function of its size and student population. Caltech has many great students; it is not a shock that it appears on the list. But again, for a school that is supposed to be among HYPSM, it is 20 spots lower than they.”

[/quote]
</p>

<p>This argument doesn't prove that it is a specialty school. This only shows that most Caltech students are not interested in taking non-technical graduate study. Most Caltech students do not apply for the professional (Business, Medical, Law) schools let alone attend them. This is not a proof that Caltech is a specialty school.</p>

<p>
[quote]
Indeed there are a few people in the know on these boards, but the majority of those who come on are high school students who don’t know what they’re talking about.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Similarly, there are a couple of undergraduates here who don't know what they are talking about. But, that's not the point. The point is that these high school students are much better informed than average people in the street.</p>

<p>
[quote]
No. Caltech is ranked highly on this forum because it’s a familiar thing to do. People aren’t ranking Caltech highly because they believe it has a renowned faculty or very strong student body, but because it has always been done

[/quote]
</p>

<p>LOL, this argument is completely ridiculous. That means Harvard is always ranked no. 1 because it has been that way from the time it was founded. What you fail to see is why Caltech can catch up with HYPSM in terms of prestige in the first place, while Caltech is relatively new compared to HYPSM. What do you think make Caltech popular in the first place? Its party? Its girls? Its dorm? or the Californian weather?</p>

<p>I can't believe that you do not count the faculty and student stature into your ranking consideration. How many times do you see Sakky, Alexandre, and other posters put these criteria as the main factors? Sakky always complain about how Berkeley has HYPSMC level faculty but lacking in selectivity for its undergraduate student body and hence pull down its ranking.</p>

<p>
[quote]
What if I claim RISD deserved just as much of a high ranking as a national university as Caltech? Would you agree with this? Why not?

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Caltech has its representatives in a number of fields, e.g.:
-Steingrimur Hermannsson, former prime minister, Iceland
-Frank Capra, film director (It Happened One Night; Lost Horizon; It's a Wonderful Life)
-Moshe Arens, former Israeli minister of defense and foreign affairs
-David Ho, director, Aaron Diamond AIDS Research Center; 1996 Time magazine Man of the Year
-Sandra Tsing Loh, writer/performer (Depth Takes a Holiday; Aliens in America; If You Lived Here, You'd Be Home by Now)
-Gordon E. Moore, chairman emeritus and cofounder, Intel Corp
-Joseph Rhodes, former state representative, deputy secretary of commerce, and member of the Public Utility Commission, Pennsylvania </p>

<p>How many fields are mentioned above? Why don't you list some non-Fine Arts notable alumni from RISD and put weight to your words.</p>