<p>I knew UC San Diego has a good bio department
I knew MIT just got started with its bio eng department.</p>
<p>But I found it hard to believe that UCSD ranked HIGHER than MIT in biomedical engineering.....</p>
<p>Nay, I still want to go to MIT :)</p>
<p>The cost of Duke may actually be less for the gifts of merit&atheletic monetary awards which the Ivy schools do NOT.</p>
<p>LOL of course if they give merit aid then the cost would be less. But you have to be pretty damn scintillating to get either. :)</p>
<p>I still want to know why someone would say the cost at Duke is more when it simply isn't...</p>
<p>MIT has BME?</p>
<p>Yes, at the outset, Duke's tuition is comparable- $31,420 per year</p>
<p>But-add on 5,000 a year for a triple room or $7,600 a year for a single. Don't forget 4,379 for mealplan, 970 for books, 524 for health fee, 275 for a Duke union fee, 190 for a recreation fee, 100 for a residential fee, and extra fees for physical education and applied music courses (all their numbers). </p>
<p>This does not include, cable, phone, parking, travel costs, and other course and lab fees. There is also a great deal of other invisible costs. There is even a 2,185 study abroad fee, to reserve your slot at Duke when you come back.</p>
<p>Who do you think pays for the multitude of sports and other scholarships? Someone has to? And if you say alumni contributions you have reaffirmed my previous point.</p>
<p>I'm not saying Duke is not a good school-I'm saying it is very expensive. Other schools may have higher tuition at the outset, but less nickel and diming.</p>
<p>Just my two cents (no pun intended)</p>
<p>Some folks just factor the tuition but you are quite correct to point out the extra expenses.</p>
<p>Haha I only paid $278 for my books...but then again...I'm taking English and phil classes.</p>
<p>someone answer my FREAKIN question! Why is Penn ranked so high when it doesn't deserve to be THAT high compared to Stanford MIT and CIT or Columbia.</p>
<p>Get the magazine and look at the breakdown and methodology.</p>
<p>Maybe you could read the past few pages so you can answer your own question? It's already been discussed. :)</p>
<p>I think Stanford looks underrated because Penn is overrated. If it were MIT that's #4, there wouldn't be that much noise. Penn is definitely overrated. Before you bash me, look at the ranking more carefully. Penn is ahead of Stanford by ONLY 1 point and Penn is ranked higher in selectivity than Stanford! I think any objective person knows this is just plain wrong. According to US News, Stanford has higher SAT range and significantly lower admit rate. However Stanford has lower % of students in the top-10% in HS. Somehow, US News placed more emphasis on class rank than SAT scores and admit rate to determine overall selectivity. Go figure!</p>
<p>SamLee, i didn't notice that before, why would they put so much on the top 10% stat...thats the only measure in the entire ranking thats not standardized (the difficulty of the HS of the attending students)</p>
<p>For goodness sake, didn't we all JUST spend several pages determining that the rankings were not, and should not be, based on <em>solely</em> selectivity via SAT scores, admit rates, etc?!?</p>
<p>i don't mean ranking, i only mean the selectivity component of the ranking.</p>
<p>(if that was directed to me)</p>
<p>why is columbia underrated? columbia should be right below MIT and stanford and i think although controversial better than penn</p>
<p>it wasn't directed towards you :)</p>
<p>to me? rhys1118</p>
<p>rhy..</p>
<p>the ranking of course is based on many categories. however, with only 1 point difference separating the two, any correction/changes in any of the categories can easily affect their relative rank. i think if that "error" in selectivity is fixed, stanford would be ranked ahead of penn instead (as expected).</p>
<p>Devil May Cry</p>
<p>I don't know where you got the info to support your statement that WashU is way more expensive than Duke. I just to both the Duke site & the WashU site and found the following info:</p>
<p>WashU
Tuition: $31,100
Student Activity Fee: $311
Student Health Fee: $631
Total Charges (excluding room and board): $32,042
Average University Room and Board: $10,064
Total Charges (including room and board): $42,106
Duke:
Tuition: $31,420
Student Activity Fee: $465
Student Health Fee: $524
Total Charges (excluding room and board): $32,409
Average University Room and Board: $9,354
Total Charges (including room and board): $41,763
Seems to me a difference of $343 per year - Hardly "way more expensive"</p>
<p>Actually, Sam Lee, I believe selectivity is only weighed 15% in the overall criteria. And of that, SAT scores are worth 50% of the 15%, with class rank 40%, and admit rate 10%, so class rank is certainly not weighed more than SAT and admit rate combined.
The only problem I can potentially see is that admit rate might be weighed a little less, but I certainly wouldn't place admit rate with more weight than class rank, seeing as the number of applicants to a school reflects some factors that do not reflect the overall quality or selectivity of the school (ie: "Harvard" syndrome: everybody applies to Harvard, regardless of whether they have a "realistic" chance of getting in or not, just to try their luck, family pressure, etc etc).
Now, I have not seen the complete rankings guide, so I can't see the difference between the SAT ranges. Now, given the info above, if the SAT range is <em>significantly</em> higher for Stanford than Penn and Penn's top 10% numbers are not that much higher than Stanford's, then your reasoning is, well, reasonable, and maybe that little bit <em>would</em> be able to boost Stanford to maybe the same score as Penn (but mind, given that the whole category is only 15%, probably not higher than Penn).<br>
But anyways, what I find very very amusing is that, is this small difference such a let-down? I mean, everybody agrees that differences between the top 15, or even top 20 schools are miniscule. You're arguing about a one point, one rank difference.</p>