<p>
</p>
<p>Dartmouth would like to have a word with you.</p>
<p>UChicago above Yale? ummmmmmm</p>
<p>Here’s an opinion, who gives a crap? Rankings aren’t accurate when they don’t favor your University.</p>
<p>What’s all this trash talk about Berkeley? I know countless students who’ve turned down HYSPM+ in favor of Cal. Albeit this is more likely for grad students, it’s certainly not uncommon among undergrads. The academics here are fantastic, the alumni network is vast, the wow factor is huge in the US and even bigger abroad, and the East Bay living is heaven on earth. I just don’t get it. Even I, a full-blooded east coaster, turned down full rides at Harvard & Columbia for a seat here.</p>
<p>@werd814: Please read this and you will understand: <a href=“http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/university-california-berkeley/1483033-does-berkeley-degree-have-wow-factor-hpysm-america.html[/url]”>http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/university-california-berkeley/1483033-does-berkeley-degree-have-wow-factor-hpysm-america.html</a></p>
<p>@awesome1114: At least Booth > Yale SOM, but I’d rather go to Yale than UofC for undergrad. </p>
<p>TBH this ranking seems pretty similar to the other well-known int’l rankings. I don’t care to agree/disagree with it.</p>
<p>awesome1114:</p>
<p>UChicago IS a better university than Yale, and most informed people tend to agree. The major world university rankings all agree:</p>
<p>[World</a> University Rankings 2012-2013 - Times Higher Education](<a href=“http://www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/world-university-rankings/2012-13/world-ranking]World”>World University Rankings 2013-14 | Times Higher Education (THE))
[Academic</a> Ranking of World Universities - 2012| Top 500 universities | Shanghai Ranking - 2012 | World University Ranking - 2012](<a href=“http://www.shanghairanking.com/ARWU2012.html]Academic”>http://www.shanghairanking.com/ARWU2012.html)</p>
<p>University rankings are laughable.</p>
<p>But:</p>
<p>43 RUTGERS STATE UNIVERSITY
47 MCGILL UNIVERSITY<br>
50 PENN STATE UNIVERSITY
51 CARNEGIE MELLON UNIVERSITY
52 OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY
54 BOSTON UNIVERSITY
55 UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA
59 UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND COLLEGE PARK
61 VANDERBILT UNIVERSITY
63 WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY
69 UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH
71 UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA
77 BROWN UNIVERSITY
82 DARTMOUTH COLLEGE
94 RICE UNIVERSITY
100 GEORGIA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY </p>
<p>Get dunked, elitists. If you can’t slam with the best, jam with the rest.</p>
<p>
What you said seems to contradict the following from The Stanford Daily:
.
In other words, even 26% of the Stanford admits were admitted to Berkeley, virtually no one chose Berkeley, which is shocking considering many of them can enjoy the in-state tuition.</p>
<p>Do undergraduates really care about the research prominence of their university’s faculty? The vast majority of those undergrads will never be involved in the creation of that research or benefit from it (certainly while attending). What really, really matters is whether the undergrads are prepared for the workforce and get jobs.</p>
<p>On that basis, the best university is Texas A&M – your resume lands on the desk of an A&M graduate and they are virtually OBLIGAGTED to hire you. If you want to live in your parent’s basement after graduation, go to the Ivy League. If you want to work, go to A&M.</p>
<p>^^</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Probable at the graduate level, but a heap of BS at the UG level! Not uncommon meand common, and common is not a proxy for … extremely rare!</p>
<p>To offer an easy to understand example, and counter the “countless” part of an earlier post about Berkeley students … to count every one of the students who was cross-admitted at Cal and Stanford AND decided to attend Cal, one only needs TWO hands and perhaps a couple of toes. The number of such students in the story about Shaw Senate presentation is below 12. Yes, as in a dozen. </p>
<p>But, that is for undergraduate studies. The world for graduate students is quite different at Berkeley, as they represent the bread and butter of that school --as well as the endless supply of indentured servants to shore the massive holes left in educating those naive UG’s who confused the two visages of a major research university.</p>
<p>This is a world ranking that weighs faculty awards, research and alumni outcomes. Berkeley is a top 10 university by those measures. If you want a ranking that looks at what 18 year-olds on a 3 hour test before they set foot in a university classroom, look to USNWR.</p>
<p>Xiggi, I don’t want to rehash old arguments, but Berkeley is far from the only top university that uses their graduate students to teach discussion and laboratory sections.</p>
<p>Maikai, the schools listed in the Top 10 don’t hire a Nobel Prize winner to boost its academic cred… they’re mostly graduates or researchers at the university at the time of award. </p>
<p>Lower scoring schools may be playing that game.</p>
<p>Yay! All three of my schools are in the top 50! Now all I need is a reason for that to affect my life and career in any way whatsoever!!</p>
<p>Actually, while I agree that the accuracy and relevance of this list is pretty low, I am strangely happy that Ohio State is NOT in the top 50… rivalries die hard.</p>
<p>UCBChemEGrad, You completely missed my point.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Amen to that! The question all parents ask is “How successful might my child be if he attends this school?” How about a ranking system that focuses on the success of ALL the graduates of a particular university? </p>
<p>I’m not saying the other data isn’t important to know, but it doesn’t directly measure a school’s ability to impart information to its students and prepare those students for a successful career.</p>
<p>Let me make an analogy…
When I show up on a tennis court, I have to actually beat the other players before I get a ranking. My PERFORMANCE is judged… the RESULT of my training, not the training itself or the people who gave me that training. I don’t get ranked by the number lessons I’ve taken with well known pros… or that I took lessons in the same group class as a current top player.</p>
<p>In sports, the reputation of the trainer/coach is based on the results of their students, not the fact that they may have been one of the world’s top ten players themselves. I find it ironic that sports gets it right and academia poops the bed with regards to this.</p>
<p>IMHO, the PERFORMANCE of these schools should be judged, but that’s never the case. I’m also not saying that some of these schools don’t belong at the top. They very well could be top PERFORMING schools. There’s just no way of telling that from this data… and that’s the crime of these ranking systems.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Cosmicfish, I laughed out loud at your comment. May I ask which rival school of Ohio State did you attend?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Psst. The people in academia aren’t the people behind the rankings.</p>