<p>Especially since the OP is looking for an undergraduate program, not a PhD program.</p>
<p>Yeah, but look again the Alexandre's list and im-blue's PHD ranking list. Quite coincidentally, the top 6 PHD schools are those in Alexandre's Tier 1. Another reason to believe there's a strong correlation between undergraduate and graduate programs - Same professors teach in under- and gradute courses :rolleyes:</p>
<p>In particular, this is so true for engineering majors.</p>
<p>Based on USNEWS rankings:</p>
<p>Top 3 PHD Engineering Programs: MIT Stanford Berkeley
Top 3 Undergradue Enginnering Schools: MIT Berkeley Stanford</p>
<p>Need I say more? :rolleyes:</p>
<p>
[quote]
Based on USNEWS rankings:</p>
<p>Top 3 PHD Engineering Programs: MIT Stanford Berkeley
Top 3 Undergradue Enginnering Schools: MIT Berkeley Stanford</p>
<p>Need I say more
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Well, the problem here is that the ranking lists of PhD Engineering program and Undergraduate Engineering program are compiled with similar methodology (mostly peer assessment). Consequently, those rankings are pretty much correlated, and hence they cannot be used to reinforce each other.</p>
<p>Well, what we can deduce from this is then if a school has a good PHD program, it's undergraduate program wouldn't be too shabby. </p>
<p>Obvious exceptions would be there are many excellent LAC's which don't have PHD programs.</p>
<p>But again, last time i checked, same professors teach/research in both under and grad levels. :rolleyes:</p>
<p>
[quote]
Obvious exceptions would be there are many excellent LAC's which don't have PHD programs.</p>
<p>But again, last time i checked, same professors teach/research in both under and grad levels.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I'll give you another example, let's consider Caltech and Berkeley in this case. Berkeley engineering is rated slightly higher than Caltech since Berkeley engineerings offer a much broader program/specialization than Caltech. Now Berkeley and Caltech PhD programs both offer small classes, highest caliber faculty and excellent facility. With these similar conditions, given that Berkeley offers a broader option than Caltech, the ranking that places Berkeley engrg slightly above Caltech sounds reasonable. But how about undergraduate program? I don't think anyone would really argue here that Caltech, together with MIT, is unbeatable for undergraduate education in engineering.</p>
<p>
[quote]
I don't think anyone would really argue here that Caltech, together with MIT, is unbeatable for undergraduate education in engineering.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>What? I would pick Berkeley over Caltech anyday for EECS undergraduate degree!!! You know that youre entitled to your opinion, but do realize other people have their own opinions. I would rather trust US & THES rankings (however flawed they may be) than pay attention what a some caltech "fanboy" has said.</p>
<p>when did Yale become good at math? I don't trust the US News Rankings for Math, just choose the schools that are strong at Engineering, it should correlate. Btw (to the OP) why do you want a Phd in math?</p>
<p>
[quote]
just choose the schools that are strong at Engineering
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Chicago is a top 6 in math and has no Engineering program at all! But never mind that, I suppose we should trust your word over a comprehensive survey of math professors.</p>
<p>Gourman Report ranking for undergrad math:
Princeton
UC Berkeley
Harvard
MIT
U Chicago
Stanford
NYU
Yale
Wisconsin Madison
Columbia
Michigan Ann Arbor
Brown
Cornell
UCLA
Illinois Urbana Champaign
Caltech
Minnesota
U Penn
Notre Dame
Georgia Tech
U washington
Purdue WL
Rutgers NB
Indiana U Bloomington
U Maryland College Park
Rice
UC San Diego
Northwestern
Texas Austin
carnegie Mellon
Johns Hopkins
Washington U St Louis
Ohio State
SUNY Stony Brook
Penn State
UVA
RPI
Illinois Chicago
U Colorado Boulder
U Kentucky
UNC Chapel Hill
Dartmouth
U Rochester
U Utah
SUNY Buffalo
Tulane
USC
UC Santa Barbara
U Massachusetts AMherst
U Oregon
Duke
Louisiana State Baton Rouge
U Arizona
case Western
Michigan State
U Pittsburgh
Brandeis
US Air Force Academy</p>
<p>LACs with large numbers of math graduates 2004 data</p>
<p>college, SAT 75th percentile, total bachelors grads, number of math grads, proportion of math grads</p>
<p>SAINT OLAF COLLEGE 1340 708 37 0.05
COLLEGE OF THE HOLY CROSS 1350 675 29 0.04
SPELMAN COLLEGE 1140 533 27 0.05
ILLINOIS WESLEYAN UNIVERSITY 1380 462 22 0.05
BRYN MAWR COLLEGE 1410 299 21 0.07
ST LAWRENCE UNIVERSITY 1250 499 20 0.04
BUCKNELL UNIVERSITY 1380 856 18 0.02
HARVEY MUDD COLLEGE 1560 176 16 0.09
REED COLLEGE 1460 310 16 0.05
WILLIAMS COLLEGE 1520 531 16 0.03
OBERLIN COLLEGE 1440 722 15 0.02
UNIVERSITY OF RICHMOND 1390 757 15 0.02
SWARTHMORE COLLEGE 1530 364 14 0.04
MACALESTER COLLEGE 1450 428 14 0.03
GUSTAVUS ADOLPHUS COLLEGE 1260 703 14 0.02
MIDDLEBURY COLLEGE 1500 632 14 0.02
MUHLENBERG COLLEGE 1320 595 14 0.02
SMITH COLLEGE 1370 688 14 0.02
WHEATON COLLEGE 1420 604 14 0.02
WABASH COLLEGE 1310 181 13 0.07
GRINNELL COLLEGE 1490 367 13 0.04
HAVERFORD COLLEGE 1460 323 13 0.04
COLGATE UNIVERSITY 1430 646 13 0.02
UNIVERSITY OF PUGET SOUND 1355 579 13 0.02</p>
<p>Gourman Report hasn't changed at all in like 50 years...and even though its an undergrad ranking it seems to be like a grad ranking moreso...how can you specifically rank so many schools specifically for one undergraduate major keeping it seperate from a grad ranking?</p>
<p>Some of the factors considered by the undergraduate edition of the Gourman Report are specific to undergraduate education and some are general characteristics of the university that would benefit both undergraduate and graduate education.</p>
<p>The Gourman Report states that its ratings are based on "extensive reseach" into the following criteria:</p>
<ol>
<li>auspices, control, and organization of the institution</li>
<li>numbers of educational programs offered and degrees conferred (with additional attention to "sub-fields" available to students within a particular discipline</li>
<li>age (experience level) of the institution and the individual discipline or program and division</li>
<li>faculty, including qualifications, experience, intellectual interests, attainments, and professional productivity (including research)</li>
<li>students, including quality of scholastic work and records of graduates both in graduate study and in practice</li>
<li>basis of and requirements for admission of students (overall and by individual discipline)</li>
<li>number of students enrolled (overall and for each discipline)</li>
<li>curriculum and curricular content of the program or discipline and division</li>
<li>standards and quality of instruction (including teaching loads)</li>
<li>quality of administration, including attitudes and policy towards teaching, research and scholarly production in each discipline, and administration research</li>
<li>quality and availability of non-departmental areas such as counseling and career placement services</li>
<li>quality of physical plant devoted to undergraduate, graduate, and professional levels</li>
<li>finances, including budgets, investments, expenditures and sources of income for both public and private institutions</li>
<li>library, including number of volumes, appropriateness of materials to individual disciplines and accessibility of materials</li>
<li>computer facility sufficient to support current research activities for both faculty and students</li>
<li>sufficient funding for research equipment and infrastructure</li>
<li>number of teaching and research assistantships</li>
<li>academic-athletic balance</li>
</ol>
<p>The weight given to each criterion above varies by discipline.</p>
<p>rtkysg, please be nice :-) Manfredman said that if the grad is good, under can't be too shaby. that't doesn't mean they nessarly rank in the same order.</p>
<p>I have a question, it's apprent that there is no 100% fool froof ranking in either under or grad department(most are a estimate) but is it safe to say one school is better than another in undergrad if it's 5 places or more above the other one? I have been accepted to multiple schools, and am trying to decide which to accept. so I would like to pick out a good one for sure(seeing it appears the better one, or most likely better one cost ALOT more.... I don't want to take a chance....)</p>
<p>NRC Rankings in Mathematics </p>
<p>1 Princeton 4.94
2 Cal Berkeley 4.94
3 MIT 4.92
4 Harvard 4.90
5 Chicago 4.69
6 Stanford 4.68
7 Yale 4.55
8 NYU 4.49
9 Michigan 4.23
10 Columbia 4.23
11 Cal Tech 4.19
12 UCLA 4.14
13 Wisconsin 4.10
14 Minnesota 4.08
15 Cornell 4.05
16 Brown 4.04
17 Cal San Diego 4.02
18 Maryland 3.97
19 Rutgers 3.96
20 SUNY Stony Brook 3.94
21 Illinois 3.93
22 Penn 3.87
23 Texas 3.85
24 Rice 3.82
25 Purdue 3.82
26 Washington 3.76
27 Northwestern 3.71
28 Ohio State 3.66
29 Johns Hopkins 3.65
30 CUNY 3.65
31 Brandeis 3.64
32 Illinois Chicago 3.58
33 Indiana 3.53
34 Duke 3.53
35 Utah 3.52
36 Penn State 3.50
37 Washington (St. Louis) 3.42
38 Carnegie Mellon 3.41
39 North Carolina 3.24
40 Southern Cal 3.23
41 Georgia Tech 3.19
42 Virginia 3.18
43 Notre Dame 3.11
44 Oregon 3.06
45 Michigan State 3.05
46 Cal Santa Barbara 3.04
47 Boston University 3.03
48 RPI 3.02
49 Dartmouth College 2.97
50 Arizona 2.96
51 Florida 2.95
52 Cal Santa Cruz 2.92
53 Rochester 2.90
54 North Carolina State 2.90
55 Massachusetts 2.90
56 Georgia 2.90
57 Pittsburgh 2.88
58 Iowa 2.85
59 Texas A&M 2.84
60 Cal Irvine 2.84
61 Colorado 2.83
62 VPI 2.79
63 SUNY Buffalo 2.79
64 Houston 2.78
65 SUNY Binghamton 2.74
66 LSU 2.74
67 Kentucky 2.72
68 Temple 2.67
69 Syracuse 2.62
70 Claremont 2.61
71 South Carolina 2.60
72 Tulane 2.59
73 Tennessee 2.59
74 Iowa State 2.59
75 Cal Riverside 2.55
76 Delaware 2.54
77 Northeastern 2.52
78 Florida State 2.49
79 SUNY Albany 2.48
80 Cal Davis 2.48
81 Arizona State 2.43
82 Kent State 2.41
83 Nebraska 2.40
84 Vanderbilt 2.39
85 Case Western 2.38
86 Oregon State 2.37
87 Kansas State 2.35
88 Clemson 2.34
89 Auburn 2.31
90 Wayne State 2.30
91 Missouri 2.30
92 Colorado State 2.28
93 Lehigh 2.22
94 Hawaii Manoa 2.20
95 Polytechnic 2.18
96 Oklahoma 2.18
97 Connecticut 2.16
98 Wesleyan 2.12
99 Miami 2.12
100 Washington State 2.10</p>