<p>Chicago first. Though not for the typical student.</p>
<p>i disagree with browninfall</p>
<p>I think Chicago/Northwestern is definately in front of Michigan</p>
<p>It is really a bit unfair and irrelevant to argue over whether Michigan is better than Wash U, Northwestern over Chicago etc. It is especially unfair to compare a mega public uni to a private college.</p>
<p>Each of the schools discussed in this thread has its own strengths and weakness, different from each other. Unless one's goal is just party bragging rights, one should focus on the school that fits. I can guarantee you that a kid who fits best at Chicago will NOT fit at Michigan, or even Northwestern, for example.</p>
<p>So, I think a discussion of differences among these places would show more intelligence (and hence, a greater aptitute for success in any of these places) than a discussion of rankings. And remember, the OP asked for the best, not a ranking.</p>
<p>newmassdad,
"I can guarantee you that a kid who fits best at Chicago will NOT fit at Michigan, or even Northwestern, for example."
Yes, that's the point after all.</p>
<p>The midwest does have good schools, but not the density of them that, say, the east coast does.</p>
<p>My son has been to OSU many times for the Science Olympiad state finals. He doesn't like the school - too big and too football for his tastes. We did, however, attend an honors college presentation. It was a good presentation, but it pointed out a problem with OSU: its very hard to graduate in four years due scheduling conflicts. The Honors kids get first crash at scheduling, so that is a definate perk. </p>
<p>OSU has a huge alumini base - maybe not in silicon valley, but definately useful.</p>
<p>I think that a lack of imagination as much as anything keeps many midwestern kids from looking beyond their borders. That, and a lack of understanding as to how merit based aid works. </p>
<p>I would add OU to the best publics list - some very good programs.</p>
<p>OU, Minnesota, OSU, etc are all relatively average schools compared to the likes of Michigan, Northwestern, or Chicago. Sorry but its the truth. The people who went to these schools from my high school were not even close to top school caliber, unless they got a full ride.</p>
<p>OhioMom, I think another factor is insularity borne of reverse snobbery: you don't need to go to any of those high falutin' schools, what's around here is good enough for you.
It's not expressed quite so baldly but if you scrape of the veneer, that's the message.</p>
<p>As a midwesterner in my formative years, degrees from two schools there, and now a resident of the Boston area, I can tell you that the reputation of east coast schools, in most cases, is not built on the quality of their educational programs. Yes, in the case of Harvard and Yale (among others), there are many positives. What do you expect, given the size of their endowments. IMHO, the real surprise is that they don't do more, given the funds they have.</p>
<p>In truth, much of the reputation of the top private schools back east is built on the sorry state of public higher ed in these same states. While states such as Massachusetts and New York, for example, have invested more in recent years than in my college years, public higher ed still gets little attention, and is widely perceived to be third tier.</p>
<p>What this does is increase the admissions pressure on private colleges, increasing their selectivity and consequently their attractiveness. And remember that many of these selective, attractive colleges have pretty small freshman classes. You need a lot of Dartmouths to give the same number of seats as one Ohio State.</p>
<p>There is no question that the SES range of an east coast private school is far narrower than a Big Ten Uni. But, is this good?</p>
<p>NewMassDad~</p>
<p>Excellent points.</p>
<p>I'm a born and raised midwesterner too. I went to Illinois. At my high school and thinking of the experiences of my friends and large family, most of the top-tier students went to Illinois, Michigan, or Wisconsin. I went to grad school in Boston -- at least 60-70% of my fellow students were easterners, a large percentage of whom had done their undergraduate work in Ivies, top LAC's, and other private schools.</p>
<p>There was no question that there was a kind of snobbery, borne of a kind of provincial ignorance. These people didn't have a clue that a TOP state school could be an amazing overall academic institution. When they heard about Illinois, Michigan, or Wisconsin, they simply thought "State school ... ugh ... State schools bad ... why not person good enough to get into private school." Clearly I exaggerate. Many people knew that a state school could be good. It's just that surprisingly, so many truly didn't have a clue.</p>
<p>(P.S. My experience was mostly in the late 70's, early 80's ... my relatives and colleagues on the East Coast tell me things are a'changin -- the New York system is good and getting better, UConn and ZooMass have their fans, Maryland gets top kids from all over the country. It used to be UVa and a huge gap).</p>
<p>Lots of good points here, except for the post that used Silicon Valley employment as a benchmark for something other than cutting-edge technology, MBA greed and overpriced housing. </p>
<p>Since it's tough to "prove" anything on this subject, I'll just toss my miscellaneous three cents into the fray and challenge anyone that disagrees to a duel:</p>
<p>Ivy League schools are more selective and prestigious than midwestern state unis because they are smaller and co-located with historical cultural and economic centers, period. HYP have exceptional faculties, but so do state Us. Do some faculty swaps and see what happens to individual reputations, especially in the humanities and social sciences. </p>
<p>The overall quality differences between Amherst, Williams and Swarthmore and Carleton, Grinnell and Macalester are microscopic. This is not to say that these schools are alike; they aren't.</p>
<p>For 90% of all undergraduates, the educational quality differences among Big Ten schools are not very great. (Sorry Michigan fans.) </p>
<p>Washington University may be over-ranked and they definitely over-market, but the school is not overrated. The only even marginally useful measure in this area is the US News peer assesment of academic excellence, where Wash Us 4.1 is the same as Vanderbilt and U Texas Austin. Even if you add the .2 that I add to any school in the Midwest and South, it still trails HYPS, Columbia, U of Chicago, Johns Hopkins and Michigan, among other universities.</p>
<br>
<blockquote> <p>In truth, much of the reputation of the top private schools back east is built on the sorry state of public higher ed in these same states.>></p> </blockquote>
<br>
<p>This is SO true. CT has UConn and four "third or fourth rate" universities. It is pathetic as far as public higher ed opportunities. As a former resident of Ohio and Illinois I WISH we had even half of those land grant universities in those states. They provide better higher ed opportunities for their students than what the NE state schools provide (each state has a flagship U....and that is IT).</p>
<p>"OU, Minnesota, OSU, etc are all relatively average schools compared to the likes of Michigan, Northwestern, or Chicago. Sorry but its the truth."</p>
<p>I agree, but I was just pointing out that Minnesota does have a few strength colleges in the University,while the rest are simply put, crap.</p>
<p>TheDad
"insularity borne of reverse snobbery" Got that in one. </p>
<p>You'll get a kick out of this one. The head of the guidance department at my son's hs said that although the kids that apply out of state do very well, for the most part "there may as well be a barbed wire fence around Ohio". CMU, Cornell, RPI and RIT are about to the end of the universe, and as far as people look.</p>
<p>Let me add some quantitative data points to a subjective arena. One rough measure of quality sometimes used in the sciences (and heavily used by savvy undergrads looking for grad schools) is the number of National Academy of Sciences members. It is easy to get the numbers online at <a href="http://www.nas.edu%5B/url%5D">www.nas.edu</a>. Here's an extract:</p>
<p>Major midwest public universities:</p>
<p>Indiana, 10
Iowa, 5
Iowa State, 5
Illinois UIUC, 24
Michigan, 24
Michigan State, 6
Minnesota, 12
Ohio State, 7
Wisconsin, 43</p>
<p>Midwestern Privates:
Northwestern, 17
Chicago, 41
Wash U, 17</p>
<p>For reference, here are some others:
Northeast publics:
U Conn, 1
U New Hampshire, 0
U Rhode Island, 0
U Mass 3</p>
<p>U Virginia, 2
U Penn, 34
UCLA, 29
UCSD, 63
Yale, 64
Stanford, 120
Harvard, 156</p>
<p>On Wisconsin!! I still think UCSD hires lots of nearly retired top profs but it sure is strong on the numbers.</p>
<p>Forgot a few in my NAS list above:</p>
<p>Purdue, 2
Notre Dame, 0</p>
<p>I should add, though, that there is also a National Academy of Engineering. I suspect some schools with a strong engineering flavor will do better. For example, U Chi, 1; Ohio State, 9, Purdue, 13. Of course, MIT has 107 and even Harvard has 17 members.</p>
<p>Rutgers 15
UNC 11
USC 10</p>
<p>Ball State as I have heard is a pretty good school.</p>
<p>Ball State used to have a great baseball coach. Now he's at.......MICHIGAN.</p>
<p>wow this is an old thread lol it's 24 days since the last post besides this one and the previous post</p>
<p>Hail to Purple!!!!!</p>