<p>Who says UMich is one of the best econ majors in the country? Maybe for grad school, not undergrad. Show me any site ranking undergrad econ programs because I've never seen anything like that. The argument of the trickle down effect from the grad school isn't that valid to me as the focus on the undergrad isn't there and the quality of the students is much lower (the avg SAT for a UMich econ major is probably at least 100 pts lower than the avg SAT at the top 20 NUs and top 20 LACs). In looking up the USN&WR ranking, UMich is listed as #25, although I didn't realize that it was considered even that good. I also love the assumption people always make that if you are criticizing a school, it must be because you got rejected. In fact, I had no interest whatsoever in applying to a big state school in the Midwest, but was rejected at Princeton & Yale, and if anything, have more respect for them after the fact than I previously did.</p>
<p>Does anyone know where northeastern, uvm, bu, or cornell rank in undergrad econ?</p>
<p>Gellino, Michigan's mean SAT score is 1330, including the schools of Nursing, Kinesiology, Art, Music etc... and in one sitting. I'd say the mean SAT score of Econ majors, if one were to look at the best score in each section (the way most private universities measure their mean SAT scores), would be 1400 or so. And yes, Michigan is ranked #25 according to the USNWR. But according to the peer assessment score, Michigan is ranked #12 in the nation. Exclusive companies, like McKinsey, Bain, BCG, Goldman Sachs, JP Morgan etc... all recruit Michigan undergrads heavily.</p>
<p>"TOP 15 PhD GRANTING ECON PROGRAMS:
Brown University
Carnegie Mellon University
Columbia University
Cornell University
Duke University
Harvard University
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Northwestern University
Princeton University
Stanford University
University of California-Berkeley
University of California-Los Angeles
University of Chicago
University of Michigan-Ann Arbor
University of Pennsylvania
University of Wisconsin-Madison
Yale University"</p>
<p>Alexandre... where is UCSD?</p>
<p>i also would like to know where Boston University stands...i want to major in econ at BU...:) thanks</p>
<p>yeah i second ucchris...is not UCSD up there?</p>
<p>and hopkins... how far down the list would it be for econ? jw</p>
<p>The last avg SAT for UMich I had seen was more ~ 1290, but even still can't believe that Econ majors would be so much higher than the rest of the school. And as far as reporting, I can't imagine that UMich is intentionally putting themselves at a disadvantage in reporting SAT scores compared to other schools. Also, why is UMich's admit rate so high at 57% in comparison to the other good public schools? (Berkeley, UCLA, W&M, UVA, UNC) Is it that much larger?</p>
<p>Why are you so concerned about the average of the students, worry about the average quality of the faculty--you are paying for them.. A big school like UM will have more smart kids to meet than anyone would have time to if that's important to you. At least 1,000 per class have well over 1400 on the SAT--that make you happy?
If one is really smarter than the rst they will let you hangout with the grad students and take some of their classes.</p>
<p>Cariana, ucchris, UCSD has a top 15 PhD program, but I was talking about undergraduate Econ. I think UCSD is a little weaker at the undergraduate level. It is definitely a top 20 undergraduate Econ program mind you, but I would not say it is quite top 10 or top 15.</p>
<p>Gatorade, Johns Hopkins has an excellent Econ program. Also top 20, but not quite top 10 or top 15.</p>
<p>Gellino, you have outdated information. Michigan's average SAT has been over 1300 for a few years.</p>
<p>State schools have no choice. They must report SATs by looking at the highest score in one sitting. Privates report their mean SAT scores by taking the highest score in each section, even if they are from different tests. This gives private schools, on average, a 40 point boost. So assuming Econ mjors at Michigan are average, they would have mean SAT scores of 1330 in one sitting...which pretty much translates to 1370 the way private schools report their SAT scores. But Econ majors at Michigan are generally sloghtly more academically inclined than many Michigan students who attend the schools of Nursing, Kinesiology, Music, Art etc...</p>
<p>And Michigan's acceptance rate is indeed high. It usually hovers in the 50%-60% range. That's because it is significantly larger than UVA, UNC and W&M. Cal and UCLA are the same size as Michigan, but they have lower acceptance rates because they are the flagship state universities of California, a state with over 35 million people (Michigan has a population of 10 million).</p>
<p>Thanks! My goodness, how can someone know so much about every school??</p>
<p>From UCSD economics department chair Richard Carson:
I am pleased to report that the UCSD Economics Department has jumped to 10th place in the US News and World Report Rankings that will be released tomorrow, up from 17th in the same rankings when last done in 2001. We are now the second ranked economic department after Berkeley at a public university.
UCSD passed Wisconsin, Minnesota, UCLA, Michigan, Caltech, Columbia, and Rochester from the earlier 2001 ranking. UCSD had the largest gain in the rankings followed by NYU and Berkeley. Minnesota had the largest drop. Otherwise the rankings were fairly stable. </p>
<p>Alexandre, any thoughts?</p>
<p>Carianna, I do not know that much about every school. I tend to know a little more about Economics because I take an active interest in the field. UCSD's jump in the rankings are not as dramatic as they seem. Very little separates #10 from #20. UCSD has come out with some excellent research in recent years...as has Cal. That explains their climbing in the rankings. But make no mistake, Cal and UCSD have always been very highly regarded in Economics. All the way back in 1991, when I was looking at universities, both were high on my list.</p>
<p>Wharton is 1 in undergrad business and 3 in MBA. :D</p>
<p>I actually think worrying about grad rankings for undergrad programs in econ is less useful for most students than rankings for, let's say, engineering or physics.</p>
<p>If you're going to go work in business or get an MBA after college, it probably doesn't matter which state of the art models or econometrics your professors publish. And employers I've talked to seem to place more weight on the overall rep of the school (and of course the grades, scores and coursework of the student) than the individual grad ranking of the department. Work opportunities, campus employment support, the quality of your classmates and the size of the alum network are more important than grad ranking.</p>
<p>If you're planning to get a Phd in Econ, then grad rankings matter if you can manage to do undergrad research with a well-known professor. Even then, you can compensate for a lesser known econ program by taking lots and lots of high level math and econometrics -- without which you'll probably be rejected by the top dozen Phd programs anyway.</p>
<p>I agree. Undergraduate rankings aren't that important. It is more important to focus on overall quality and fit. Undergraduate education should be about self-discovery and personal growth.</p>
<p>Yeah definately, I was amazed at the emphasis on rankings I've seen, I always just thought it was best to go where you felt the most comfortable and challeneged, don't get me wrong.</p>
<p>Rankings are a recent obsession. In the 1970s, it wasn't there. It was barely there in the 80s. But since the mid 90s, it has been a major decision-making factor, and I think many universities have since decided to market themselves.</p>
<p>The other problem is that where grad rankings are based on general faculty rep, they don't always keep up with the rapid faculty changes. Econ is especially tough because the market for good profs is so fluid. So many good schools find themselves cherry-picked one year but will hold onto their places, while much lower-ranked departments will sometimes rise too slowly.</p>
<p>The famous case is Boston U. Its rankings barely twigged when it hired lots of big names from the top places. But just when its ranking started to rise it began losing many of those same guys. Few outsiders would know of this.</p>
<p>Some economists think that departments should be ranked by mailing out copies of faculty lists without department names attached. Of course, we will recognize all the big departments, but it becomes eye-opening to rank them when all you're looking at is which profs are actually where.</p>