<p>what made you decide?</p>
<p>Yeah. I mean, most people I know have Yale at the very top (not me)
It's great to know someone prefered Columbia over Yale.</p>
<p>Can't address that specifically, but there is a link on another thread in the columbia discussion section that lists the # of graduates that have won any nobel. The top 4 as I recall went like this: Cambridge 80, U of Chicago 79, Columbia 71 and MIT 59.</p>
<p>There is no Nobel in Biology, only Chemistry, Physics, Medicine, Literature, Peace, and Economics. As for Yale's Laureates, they were 16 more or less, far beyond Columbia, Harvard, Princeton or even Cornell</p>
<p>far beyond in what way. . . ?</p>
<p>Columbia is more prestigious than Yale in academics. For the first half of 20 century, Columbia was considered the top 2 research university in the US along with Harvard. Now it is still equally respected as Harvard/Stanford/Berkeley. However, as an undergrad at Columbia, you have to be more independent since there is less school spirit.</p>
<p>jono: sorry, I meant to say far below (ooops) in number of laureates, because of longhorn's question</p>
<p>I'd choose Yale over Columbia any day of the week. Just my 2 cents though.</p>
<p>That's hardly 2 cents.</p>
<p>sidneyyang, I completely disagree. Columbia is not more prestigious than Yale in any aspect.</p>
<p>I think the words prestige and prestigious should become new ******** words on these boards, like **** and *******</p>
<p>
[QUOTE]
sidneyyang, I completely disagree. Columbia is not more prestigious than Yale in any aspect.
[/QUOTE]
For that to be true, every department at Yale would have to exceed the corresponding department at Columbia, which is ridiculous. Yale has more mystique as a general institution for historical reasons, but in academics it is all fair game.</p>
<p>To give some idea about academics, let's take a look at the number of Nobel Prize won by professors at selected institutions in the past ten years (1995-2004). More details can be found at nobelprize.org.</p>
<pre><code> Physics Chemistry Medicine Economics Total #
</code></pre>
<p>Columbia 1 0 2 3 6
Stanford 4 0 0 1 5
MIT 2 1 1 0 4
Caltech 1 1 1 0 3
Princeton 1 0 1 1 3
Berkeley 0 0 0 2 2
Chicago 0 0 0 2 2
Upenn 1 1 0 0 2
Cornell 1 0 0 0 1
Harvard 0 0 0 1 1
Yale 0 0 0 0 0</p>
<p>Not to mention that in history Columbians have won 71 Nobel Prize in total while Yalies no more than 20.</p>
<p>Sidneyyang, that's a great set of statistics, and thanks for providing it. Columbia's progress, or some would say recovery, during the past decade has been phenomenal, and this is proof positive.</p>
<p>I don't know what the applicability of these numbers is other than saying that there are currently a few more superstars at columbia than yale (columbia has 2, not 3 in medicine, and Yale has Sidney Altman). Overall, if you look at National Academy Members, Yale still beats out columbia 104 to 83, Yale having 3326 faculty members while columbia has 3224.</p>
<p>And what is the applicability of the numbers you present, crimsonbulldog?</p>
<p>who knows? maybe a better measure of the average faculty instead of # of superstars.</p>
<p>the point is that trying to see which school has better academics is splitting hairs</p>
<p>yes, but still Columbia rocks</p>
<p>of course, they both do, and this squabbling over prestige is senseless</p>