<p>^^there is probably a third reason, related to #1, as in your case: Why would any northeaster worth his salt go south, unless s/he could not get into a top NE school thus, inferring Duke as a “match”.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I don’t see Duke as RISING. It’s risen in the past but is no more prestigious now than in the 1990s. It’s gone as high as it can go</p>
<p>Actually the PA of Duke at USNWR has dropped from it’s high point a couple of years ago.</p>
<p>^^yes, and so did Dartmouth’s – it’s PA declined 0.1 last year, dropping it out of the top 10. We’ll see how much love it has in a couple of weeks. :)</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I mean in terms of programs/strength in certain departments. Prestige has been stable, I agree.</p>
<p>I didn’t think Dartmouth was overrated until 8 people at my school (myself included) received “likely letters” practically begging us to attend.</p>
<p>Ran across this thread today and wanted to add my 2 cents… </p>
<p>To me, Dartmouth is a really fascinating school to examine, especially now when univs are in such flux. </p>
<p>On the one hand, what posters like slipper1234 and others say is right on - Dart grads tend to have a lot of loyalty to their alma mater, the school exists pretty much completely to serve its students and give them as many opportunities as possible, and Dartmouth enjoys a strong and supportive alum network. </p>
<p>At the same time, I think one of the reasons Dartmouth is facing a bit of an identity crisis is because, at least of late, large research universities (especially urban ones) are really rising in popularity and standing. </p>
<p>I think earlier on, especially during most of the 20th century, Dartmouth may have enjoyed a more rarefied air than it enjoys now. LACs were still very much in vogue, Dartmouth’s endowment wildly exceeded anything offered by its most immediate research-univ peers, and the alums and the administration were on the same page when it came to overseeing the College. </p>
<p>In the past 15-20 years, it looks like urban research univs have really caught on in the college marketplace. For example, Columbia, Chicago, and Penn have all enjoyed a boom in applications and, just as importantly, a boom in financial resources. These three schools all struggled with somewhat negative student experiences in the 1980s and 90s, but that’s improved considerably of late. </p>
<p>With all this in mind, it’s hard to say whether Dart is underrated or overrated. In a certain light, it’s a leading member of the LACs, and still offers a heck of a lot to a potential student. On the other hand, large-scale research universities seem to be gaining more and more dominance in the college marketplace, and it seems as if Dart may be making some changes in the coming years to keep up.</p>
<p>Also, a quick note to those who question the benefit of going to a research univ as an undergrad as opposed to a LAC (slipper1234, danas as well seem to be pretty big supporters of the LAC-environment):</p>
<ul>
<li><p>Many LACs offer a very particularized environment, and for many, a large urban univ can offer a more varied college experience. I attended the polar-opposite of Dartmouth for undergrad (Univ of Chicago), and I really enjoyed it. I never applied to the Dart/Williams crowd because I really wanted a city and just felt that rural New England would be too isolating.</p></li>
<li><p>While close contact to faculty members is great, and probably leads to a more “personal” educational environment, again, it all depends on what you want from your college experience. For me, and maybe this sounds rude, I cared a lot more about exposure to superb leaders in a certain academic field, and oftentimes preferred their lectures to what some of my classmates had to say about a certain topic. Urban research univs tend to have the most high-powered faculties, and if that’s what a student wants, it becomes a draw over the rural LACs. </p></li>
</ul>
<p>On another unrelated note, my parents both did their undergrad/grad school in Europe, where the research-model of universities completely rules the day. They always scratched their heads and laughed when we took a college trip and visited some LACs. They could never understand why an institution would devote so much time and so many resources to a group of 18-22 yr old kids.</p>
<p>As cutting-edge research becomes more and more the defining feature of an elite university, Dartmouth is going to be in a lot of trouble. It’s really not very easy to recruit star faculty to Hanover, NH.</p>
<p>
- “Cutting edge” research is only becoming important in STEM fields. Less than half of Dartmouth’s students are studying those fields, and I’m willing to bet a significant chunk of those are pre-med or plan to go into something unrelated. Why would Dartmouth need “star faculty” in those areas?</p>
<ol>
<li>Oh, please. There are plenty of non-TT top scientists who would jump at the chance to teach at a prestigious school.</li>
</ol>
<p>“non-TT”</p>
<p>I am unfamiliar with this term. What does “TT” stand for?</p>
<p>IBClass - the question isn’t whether Dart is a great school or not - it certainly is, but of late, urban research univs are certainly gaining traction in the college marketplace.</p>
<p>Keep in mind, for most of the 20th century, after HYPS, Dartmouth was a PRIME destination for top talent. Penn, Columbia, Chicago, etc. had somewhat poor reputations and were not seen as good targets for the most promising (read: mainly WASP and connected) high school talent. (Moreover, Brown was seen as a bit of a backwater school.)</p>
<p>Nowadays, that’s changing quite a bit because Penn et al. are surging a bit, and Dartmouth, while doing a good job of maintaining its status, does not enjoy as much separation from its urban research univ peers.</p>
<p>A big part of the attraction of a research univ is it has the potential of bringing in money - big time gov’t spending (look at Penn, Stanford, etc.), and that’s alluring to any institution. More or less, research univs seem to be on the upswing, where if you look at the state of LACs (and read articles on it), its a much more unstable world for them.</p>
<p>
Tenure-Track</p>
<p>
Eh, I’m not sure I agree. In terms of [applications</a> per spot](<a href=“http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/1062735245-post11.html]applications”>http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/1062735245-post11.html), Dartmouth is behind only HYPS and Columbia and far ahead of Chicago and Penn. </p>
<p>In any case, why does it matter? It’s not a popularity contest, and there are certainly enough top applicants to go around. Dartmouth and the other top LACs aren’t going anywhere anytime soon.</p>
<p>Now, if you want to make the case for Dartmouth’s medical school, I would be more willing to agree.</p>