<p>Where are Berkeley & Northwestern? I don't get it. What is Skidmore, Macalester, etc.?!!! I thought Michigan and UVA were already designated as "public ivies" by Richard Moll. </p>
<p>25 New "Ivies" in alphabetical order:</p>
<p>Boston College
Bowdoin
Carnegie Mellon
Harvey Mudd and Pomona
Colby
Colgate
Davidson
Emory
Kenyon
Macalester
Michigan
NYU
North Carolina
Notre Dame
Olin
Reed
Rensselaer Polytechnic
Rice
Rochester
Skidmore
Tufts
UCLA
Vanderbilt
Virginia
Washington University</p>
<p>It's a silly list made by people who don't matter. They didn't list schools that are already really prestigious (Stanford, Northwestern, etc...)</p>
<p>Many of the schools are not on par with the ivy league in terms of academic caliber.</p>
<p>1). There is already a thread on this topic with multiple posts on it you may want to search for.
2.) They mention Stanford in the opening paragraph as a known academic powerhouse. Northwestern's omission is unclear whether they think it's above or below the named schools.
3.) What makes Newsweek any more people "who don't matter" than the people at USNWR?</p>
<p>The ranking isn't based off of data...btw, Stanford, Duke, MIT, CIT, NU, Chicago...those are schools already considered among the best in the nation and pretty much dominate every academic poll, so why both mentioning them again?</p>
<p>Mr. Pink, Understanding that places like Skidmore obviously have no place on that list, maybe you should take a closer look at Bowdoin, Harvey Mudd/Pomona, Emory, Olin, Rice, Tufts, Virginia, WashU -- These schools are near/on par with some of the Ivy League, and are highly selective and competitive as well. Keep in mind that this list, aside from some obvious flooks, is a rehash of the generally-accepted top US universities (taking a look at my list) that are not in the Ivy-group or have been overlaps for at least 50 years.</p>
<p>Some of the LAC's they name and possibly BC make the list a bit silly, but the rest of the list is pretty sensible. I don't like how they essentially created an Old "New Ivy" list (Stanford, Chicago, etc.) and a New "New Ivy" List. It's confusing and awkward.</p>
<p>Their rankings are based off data. They claim to have consulted profs, admissions officers, stats, students, alumni, grad school officers and recruiters. They just don't tell you how they used the data to arrive at the results. </p>
<p>How is including BC on that list any more silly than including NYU?</p>
<p>People have heard of UCLA because they have won more NCAA basketball championships than any other school, not because they know it's a good academic school.</p>