<p>Here's an interesting article on college rankings, published by the Cornell Daily Sun. It discusses how the traditional ranking systems that we see are not accurate at all, and that Cornell is actuallly underrated. </p>
<p>I agree. Cornell may not be as rich as Harvard, Yale, or Princeton, but the academics are up to their level. Also, I think that since part of Cornell is public, it is placed lower on the list, as are all other excellent, but underrated public schools like Berkeley, Michigan, and Virginia.</p>
<p>berkeley was placed second to harvard in the times world ranking... not completely underrated.</p>
<p>Hmmm...I wonder what criteria the world rankings are using. Definitely not stellar teaching. Berkeley is notorious for bad professors who care more about their research rather than teaching undergraduate students.</p>
<p>i don't have extensive knowledge of berkeley. but i have been to a organic chemistry lecture (i am a junior) just to get a feel of the berkeley environment and my brother goes there (of course, i can't make accurate judgement based on just one class). the professor for the class i sit in was actually really good. i think in any top ranking schools with top research facilities, there will be professors who care more about their research.</p>
<p>going back to ranking. the world ranking are based on a peer review score, which has half the weight of the total score, an international faculty review score, an international student review score, faculty-to-student ratio, and a citations-to-faculty ratio. </p>
<p>berkeley draws a number of ambitious international students. to my personal knowledge especially asia. everyone is hong kong knows about berkeley but few knows about cornell. of course, that does not mean that cornell's academics are below berkeley. it simply indicate that in order to be a top ranking school, it needs to attracts good students.</p>