<p>As has been noted many times, there are plenty of colleges that are academic peers (or more) to colleges in the Ivy League. I would hardly call this group of colleges (my list or others) "second-string" to the Ivies. </p>
<p>By contrast, compare Ivy League athletics with the Big Ten or any of the other major college conferences and I doubt that, when talking about national level athletic achievement, any of the Ivy colleges would even be "second-string," Here is how the Division I colleges in the USNWR Top 30 finished up in the Directors Cup last year. </p>
<p>1 Stanford
2 UCLA
3 U North Carolina CH
4 U Michigan
5 USC
9 UC Berkeley
11 Duke
13 U Virginia
22 Notre Dame
23 Wake Forest
30 Northwestern
33 Vanderbilt</p>
<p>Cornell just happens to be the largest undergrad of the ivy league with 7 diff colleges....of course its going to be the easiest to get into b/c it can accommodate the most students</p>
<p>You really are reading way too much into my comments. I have rarely commented on Johns Hopkins and don’t think very much about the school. The school has a strong reputation which I think is primarily due to its close affiliation with the medical field. However, this reputation is not sustained in undergraduate student matriculation data as indicated by the school’s low yield of 32%-tying the school for 25th with Southern Cal and Wash U within the USNWR Top 30. But, yield aside, if your charge is that I think Johns Hopkins is overrated on USNWR because of their undergraduate PA score, then you are correct. I think Johns Hopkins is overrated on USNWR because of their undergraduate PA score. </p>
<p>Re data, because of posts like yours, I have only recently begun to look more closely at the college. Johns Hopkins does not provide the same level of detail about their student body and the school environment compared to other colleges that publish a CDS. They control what information is released to the public and that is their institutional prerogative (just as it is with Wash U and others who don’t publish a CDS). I will look again when the new IPEDs data is uploaded, but I hope you realize that there are some differences in the data found in the federally-reported IPEDs and the data published by the admissions folks.</p>
<p>As for lacrosse, I like the game (men…and women-go Northwestern!) and Hopkins has a long and great history of success in the sport. However, I don't think anyone could accurately describe lacrosse as a major men’s college sport. Only 56 colleges play Division I men’s lacrosse and 16 teams, 29% of the participating schools, make the NCAA tournament. No Division I college south of Durham, NC has a team and only a handful of colleges west of the Alleghenies. No school in any of the Pac 10, Big 12, SEC, WAC, MWC, Conference USA or Sunbelt even fields a men’s team and only Penn State and Ohio State of the Big Ten have men’s teams. Lacrosse may be growing in popularity in your area, but it is far from a major college sport. BTW, 81 Division I colleges field women’s programs and the growth here is higher and probably because of Title IX, but it is still dwarfed by sports like women’s basketball with 328 Division I colleges participating.</p>
<p>I vote that Carnegie Mellon should be on that list as well.</p>
<p>@callylilly If I was going to become a doctor (almost but engineering and business got the best of me) JHU would be my dream school. IMO its the best place in the world to become a doctor.</p>
<p>Wow! Living in Big Ten/11 country and you have to ask why Saturday afternoon football is a consideration for college? Try asking the same question on the 'Bama, LSU or Auburn threads :)</p>
<p>cally:</p>
<p>may I suggest you learn how to spell the sport (no caps) prior to opening day in March?</p>
<p>I associate sports fans with drunkenness, stupidity, and superficial values. I don't think I am the only person who wants to stay away from the rah-rah mentality.There are so many more important things to care about. </p>
<p>JHU is awesome. Wonderful culture. It is actually bordered on three sides by good neighborhoods, cool restaurants, etc. There is one section that is kind of a bad neighborhood. Overall, Baltimore is a fun city. The Hamden neighborhood near JHU is kinda artsy. McCabes bar has great food. JHU sports fans can satisfy their interests by going to nearby Orioles and Ravens games.</p>
<p>i'd choose hamilton or trinity over furman any day.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>it's because of religious affiliation and public status - two factors that lead to self-selectivity in admissions pools. that list is best used when comparing two universities of the same designation, in this case, two private (for the most part), nondenominational universities.</p>
<p>“I associate sports fans with drunkenness, stupidity, and superficial values.”</p>
<p>could not be more off the mark . . . . Absolutely, but don’t tell me that this behaviour is limited to the great unwashed of the non-Ivy world. Students at the Ivy colleges (and nearly all colleges for that matter) also sometimes imbibe heavily…or worse…at sporting events and elsewhere. . . . </p>
<p>. . . . </p>
<p>Literally millions of people love college athletics and attend major college sporting events. It won’t matter to everyone, but it will matter to many. Is it or should it be the defining aspect of undergraduate life? No, of course not, but college athletics are fun for undergraduates and for alumni and frequently are a part of how many people in our society stay in touch with their college and with their college friends. . . .</p>
[quote]
I associate sports fans with drunkenness, stupidity, and superficial values.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>. . . . You really ought to try [to] open your mind to the possibility that there might be some redeeming value in sports . . . . as evidenced by the millions of sports fans all over the world. . . .</p>
<p>temima,
No one is tearing down Hopkins (other than perhaps you with these inane posts). </p>
<p>Re lacrosse, not sure how you interpreted my comments to mean the game is for wimps or how that silly comment has any relevance at all to this discussion. I like the game and the men’s game is very physical. But no matter how hard you stamp your feet, that is not going to make it a major Division I men’s college sport. In a national college context, Johns Hopkins and lacrosse probably has about as much meaning to the folks on the West Coast as UCLA’s women’s national champion water polo team does to those on the East Coast. And the folks in the Southeast, the Southwest, the Plains, the Rocky Mountains and most of the Midwest couldn’t give a hoot about either. </p>
<p>According to JHU personnel with whom I have communicated, I have been advised that they do not publish a CDS. You can prove me (and them) wrong by posting a link to it.</p>
<p>About the revealed preferences working paper, it was said, </p>
<p>
[quote]
the "study" over-sampled NE kids
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Where is the evidence that there was oversampling of one region rather than another? (In other words, what is the base rate of the kind of students the authors looked for--high-achieving students in prep schools--in each region of the country? What number of students would be expected in each region?) Why does that matter anyway? The working paper breaks out regional patterns of preference, so any peculiarity of preference patterns specific to one region in their data set was already reported in the working paper.</p>
<p>When it comes to sports, there are arguments on both sides. You've got the "rah-rah" sports are everything crowd (e.g. many large public universities) and then you've got the highly intellectual, anti-sports crowd (e.g. the top LACs, MITs and Chicagos of the world).</p>
<p>I'd argue that neither extreme is the most optimal place to be (and I'm a sports nut). You want to be at a school that offers a wide / broad range of interests (including sports) and I believe that, at the margin, sports can certainly help in developing and strengthening school spirit (both students and alumni alike). But it is, again, at the margin. Let's face it, you go to college to get an education first and foremost. Being in a Bowl Game on national TV is nice, but after the game's over, who cares? Does it really affect your life?</p>
<p>In fact, I've argued before that after a certain point, a very high profile, $$$-making national program can actually be detrimental to the perceived academic reputation of the university in question. Notre Dame / Mich / USC = football or Duke / UNC = basketball come to mind immediately (not that they aren't solid academic institutions -- they are, but let's face it, that's not what comes to mind immediately to your average layman). This is precisely why U. of Chicago decided to abolish its football program decades ago -- in order to deemphasize sports and to concentrate on academics. Chicago actually had a powerhouse football program prior to this decision which shocked many at the time. Now this is an extreme example, but decades later can anyone question the school's decision? Chicago enjoys a sterling reputation for outstanding academics. Period. </p>
<p>That's why I think that the Ivies actually strike a great balance between these two extremes. Sure, you're not going to be seeing Harvard play Yale at a Bowl Game, but no other football tradition goes as far back as the Ivies -- they have a charm of their own. For example, who cares if the next Heisman winner is not coming out of Hanover? There is nothing to suggest that Dartmouth alums are any less loyal than any other university across the nation.</p>
<p>READ the footnotes. The authors clearly state that they purposely [over] sampled high schools that send a lot of kids to top tier colleges, which just happened to be located in the NE. By defintion, the largest senders of kids to NE colleges are NE high schools and prep schools. Indeed, an early draft that was available online even listed the HS in the study. But, that draft is no longer available online. </p>
<p>In essence, the authors surveyed high schools that send a lot of kids to the highly selective schools, Eight of which happen to be Ancient. Is there any wonder that the authors found a statistical preference for the Ancient Eight? As Homer Simpson would say: Doh!</p>
<p>Does it matter, not really, unless people quote the survey as value-added. Why it matters it that the vast majority of kids (and/or families) prefer to attend a college within a 4-6 hour drive from home. If the data sample includes a of kids from high schools that prefer the NE colleges you will find that Stanford, WashU and Carleton lose the cross admit battles nearly every time. If the data sample only includes a handful of kids from the west (no footnotes on where the % of surveyed kids are from, so just a supposition, but a GLARING stat error IMO), then the results would ONLY relevant to high achieving, wealthy kids (which is fine, but they authors should be more upfront about it). [As any AP Stats kid could tell.]</p>
<p>Regardless of my opinion, seach cc and you'll find plenty of statistical criticisms of the "study."</p>
<p>the_prestige,
Imagine going to a college like Princeton and having the school participate in a nationally-televised, nationally meaningful athletic event and having the students and the alumni get all excited and very proud about it and having the campus just buzzzzzzzzzz. Oh yeah-that happened not that long ago when Princeton upset UCLA in the NCAA basketball tournament. The Princeton folks that I know were just giddy about that win (and many probably still are today). And why not….It was fun!</p>
<p>And I’m sure that U Penn fans and alums have been very excited over their school’s annual participation in the NCAA basketball in recent years and probably Harvard is feeling the same way right now about its men’s hockey team and Dartmouth about their women’s hockey team. And how about that massive crowd (57,000+) at this year’s Harvard-Yale football game. I’m sure the Harvard folks had a good time and that event won’t be forgotten anytime soon. </p>
<p>It’s all very well and good with Ivy fans when these things are going on for their colleges. But somehow it’s not a big deal (and may even be an image destroyer???) when other non-Ivy schools are demonstrating similar (or better) academic prowess and also providing this great athletic excitement for its body of supporters and on a more consistent, broader, sustained and national basis?!? Sounds like a double standard to me. </p>
<p>The bottom line is that the athletic quality of the Ivy League for major Division I college sports like football and basketball and baseball is poor. Furthermore, and more important for some people like me, the scene that the Ivy colleges generate for their events are greatly inferior to that provided by their academic peers in the Pac 10, the ACC, the Big Ten, the SEC and even Conference USA. Students that attend USNWR Top 30 colleges in these conferences aren’t “rah-rah, sports are everything” types. That is a false depiction. Instead, most are great students attending great colleges that happen to have great athletic programs and athletic scenes that go along with them. </p>
<p>Some students may not care about athletics and the benefits that come with such a scene and will choose to go to an Ivy or to a U Chicago or some other college that does not provide this. Great choice and good luck. However, many others want to have their cake and eat it too and want that combination of great athletics and great athletic life. For these students, the colleges that offer top academics and top athletics could well be the better choice over the Ivies.</p>