Forbes Best colleges list

Parent Cafe
241

<p>“If they wanted to aim for the Ivys and/or all the tippy top name/prestige schools, thats fine by me”</p>

<p>Of course whatever a particular family works out, thats fine with me. My only question to POIH is that it seems like the kids were expected to apply to the most selective schools (which just so happened to be something called Ivy +) from a fairly young age. It seems that if one of his kids felt a smaller school, such as a LAC (even the most selective ones such as Swarthmore/Williams/Amherst) would be a better fit, it would not be acceptable because selective colleges=HMPSY.</p>

242

<p>jym626:

</p>

<p>Yes, she did apply and got into UCB EECS, she would have joined it over Brown, Dartmouth, Duke, JHU, or the like.</p>

<p>So the ranking we came to was not a pressurized ranking for DD but what she really liked and always dreamed of.
She liked Cambridge/Boston so much that she moved MIT over Stanford/Princeton.
An Ivy obssessed family would have sent DD to Princeton and not MIT. DD wanted to be in Cambridge and loved MIT and is there by choice and not by pressure.</p>

<p>For an undergraduate experience, you can’t just go wrong with HMSPY and that was the conclusion of our 3 years research of US News top 50. It was a research and conclusion drawn by DD based on information and discussion with me. </p>

<p>Rest of her list was ordered based on her major and that is why UCB EECS was so high on her list eventhough ranked 21 on the US News top 50.</p>

243

<p>

</p>

<p>The only UC DD would have gone was UCB EECS program otherwise we found as part of our research that OLIN or Rice would be a better match for DD and she applied to both.</p>

<p>UCSB is a party school and so was cutoff in the 9th grade itself.</p>

244

<p>Where’s Bowling Green?</p>

245

<p>Since I’m (kinda) in defense of the concept of “rankings” and in favor of none of them (because they all have problems, and some like Forbes are beyond help)</p>

<p>let me try it this way…</p>

<p>I want a car. I’m generally familiar with cars and I love cars. </p>

<p>I go to the Car and Driver “Best” Cars of 2010 issue knowing full well that there are cars in that issue that do NOT meet my needs or desires or wallet, but also believing that some ranked cars will. I also know that the issue will have exotic cars unknown to me or any of my acquaintances and that this qualitative assessment by the magazine staff and their impressions could give me a reason to check that vehicle out further. I also know that the list is by no means complete and to use this as my only resource would be foolish. </p>

<p>I then use that issue to identify “well-regarded” cars and then use the specific information available in that issue to rule in/out certain models. I want a skid-pad test of 1g (cornering), slick lines, a 1/4 mile time under 12 seconds, and sex appeal. (Some clearly quantifiable, some certainly not.) I don’t care about country of origin, how many it seats it has, whether there is a local dealer, or whether Tatooed Bob down at the diner has ever heard of it. Since this is a performance vehicle, practical concerns that Car and Driver considers like costs of a tune-up and MPG take a backseat (if there is one ;)) to the rush of driving such a beast. But , again, my wallet ain’t that thick so I have to have that in somewhere, just not at 35.5 % of the total rank. I’ll use 20% instead when I re-order the rank to meet my wants and needs. I’ll vary some others too. Top Speed is not a factor over 140 so after that benchmark you don’t get any more points. </p>

<p>The list has vehicles from a $500K Ferrari to a $23K Subaru WRX. The Subaru misses on slick and sexy, the Ferrari misses on affordability and …well, that’s about it. :wink: I re-order the list based upon my own criteria.</p>

<p>I get other opinions. I admit my Ferrari lust. I admit to its greater appeal, some of which is the “wow” or “prestige” factor among the well-informed car fashion nuts and the performance nuts at the track. But not all. It’s a heckuva car and would be a blast to drive for 4 years. And yes, I know that a Honda Fit would get me to work. I want more than that. </p>

<p>I use all other resources, both on-line or seat of the pants or word of mouth. I narrow my lists. I test-drive all the cars. I apply for financing and I purchase the one that is the best one for me that I can afford. In my case, that wouldn’t have been the Ferrari. :wink: </p>

<p>(BTW, I drive a truck. :wink: The analogy is not perfect. I’m just trying to wrap my head around why use of rankings is “bad” or how the use of “well-regarded” or “very selective” is good. I can certainly see the foolish use of either. )</p>

246

<p>curmudgeon: But the analogy is excellent.</p>

<p>We looked at US News top 50 because both DW and I have not gone to school/college/university n USA so was not familiar with the landscape of academic insititutions. So decided to go with US News because we believed they have done the ground work and we will have readily available information about colleges.</p>

<p>Why didn’t we bothered to look beyond top 50 because we wanted a Research University with a doctoral degree so ruled out LACs.</p>

<p>We came to our list with HMSPY on the top then what is wrong in it. We are paying for it from our own pocket. You pick the car best fullfil your need and the one that you can afford.</p>

<p>We did the same.</p>

247

<p>PG:

</p>

<p>No, we never considered LAC because we wanted a Research University with a doctrate degree. It has nothing to do with prestige.</p>

248

<p>

</p>

<p>This is what we did and came out with a list. Seems quite balanced to me.
while DD and I started backward from US News top 50. We used to discuss information about colleges on the list with
respect to engineering and pre-med which of interest to DD.
By the time DD was ending her junior year we have trimmed the list to about 30 colleges. </p>

<p>DD then provided a list of her top 10 and we made them a must visit colleges. These were in order of preference
Harvard, MIT, Stanford, Princeton, Yale, [Caltech | Columbia], UCB, U. Penn, Brown.</p>

<p>We took a tour of all of the 10 colleges during the summer after 11th grade.
Based on all the information and a physical visit DD made up her list of colleges to apply during September with a time line:

  1. EA – MIT/Caltech – Oct 20th
  2. USC, Olin, Rice, UCs – Nov. 20th
  3. Harvard, Princeton, Stanford – Dec 1st
  4. Cornell, CMU, Dartmouth – Dec 7th.
    With Columbia, Yale, U. Penn, Brown, Duke, JHU, NW, UChicago as stand by with the following criteria.
    If “NO” from MIT EA but a “Yes” from Caltech EA then only apply to Columbia, & Yale.
    If “NO” from both MIT EA and Caltech EA then apply to all stand by colleges.
    Otherwise done.</p>

<p>She was relieved on Dec. 7th with Caltech EA but was done on Dec. 15th with MIT EA.</p>

<p>She subsequently got everywhere except Harvard.</p>

<p>According to DD high school CC

  • HMSP - Reaches
  • Caltech, UCB EECS, Olin, Cornell, Dartmouth - Match
  • USC, Rice, UCLA/SD, CMU - Safety</p>

<p>So it was 4 reaches, 5 matches, 5 safeties.</p>

249

<p>POIH, let me reiterate that I have no problem if your D wanted HYPSM schools. </p>

<p>You wrote:

</p>

<p>I do not agree with this. MIT is right up there with the Ivies and even if you look at rankings (since you say you consulted those), MIT is ranked #4. I have not heard of people putting Ivies before MIT but rather on part with one another. I surely would see many “Ivy” or “elite” college types who would pick MIT over Princeton as they are ranked similarly in terms of prestige/reputation but MIT is more science/tech oriented and so for a student with those interests, MIT would be on par with Princeton in terms of “eliteness” but MIT would be even better for someone in certain sciences/tech fields. </p>

<p>Thanks for explaining the college list as I did not glean from your prior posts on the thread that your D has schools like USC< Olin, CMU, JMU on the list. Still, had she not gotten into the EA schools, did she not have any safety school?</p>

<p>You mention cutting off a college from the list back in ninth grade. Were you working on the college list that young?</p>

250

<p>By the way, for grad school, my own kid picked MIT over Columbia and Cornell (and several other top programs in her field). Not everyone goes by “Ivy”. Her roommate recently chose Tufts for grad school in her respective field over acceptances at Yale, Brown and Columbia.</p>

251

<p>

</p>

<p>Education have always been very important to us and yes we indeed started working on this list starting 9th grade.</p>

252

<p>Yes, it is commonly understood when it comes to academics that MIT, Cal Tech and Stanford are the same as saying Ivy, even though they are not in the Ivy Athletic League. People then argue endlessly about a few others.</p>

253

<p>

</p>

<p>So you agree that every one come up their own ranking and it is no different than using Ivies as the list if some one don’t want to put effort since 9th grade.</p>

254

<p>

</p>

<p>No, I don’t agree. I posted about this in post #221. Using rankings is not the same as having reaches/matches/safeties or favored schools over other schools. Everyone has the latter. Not everyone consults published or nationally recognized rankings. It is different to favor some schools over others than saying “I want Ivy” or “I want Ivy+” or “I want top 10 or 20 on USNews”. The mere picking of a college list implies favoring some schools than others. The mere use of reach/match/safety is part of compiling a college list. I don’t refer to that as “ranking.” The use of “rankings” to me refers to published rankings.</p>

<p>Education and college is extremely important to my family too. It had nothing to do with “putting in the effort starting in ninth grade.” We did not feel it was necessary or appropriate to be choosing colleges prior to junior year and that was not a focus or activity my kids engaged in prior to that time. The goal of trying to go to a “good college” was there from a young age but the actual process of selecting colleges didn’t begin until junior year. One exception was that in the middle of tenth grade, younger D asked to graduate HS a year early and so her application year was junior year and so in the middle of tenth, we had to start looking into colleges which we never expected to do and hadn’t even gotten D1’s results yet from her college process. So, D1 dealt with college admissions stuff in junior and senior years and D2 dealt with it the latter half of soph year and then applied in junior year. The goals were there from a much younger age but the actual looking into specific colleges didn’t start until then. I’m personally not that into focusing on college admissions (other than trying to do well in school) for more then the last two years of high school, even though education is highly valued in our family.</p>

255

<p>curmudgeon - I understand your analogy with the cars, but of course there are some differences that are critical. But to get to the heart of it, saying there is a “best” car is far better understood by most than saying there is a “best” college. I haven’t looked at an auto mag for ages, but I imagine they still divide them up into types; i.e. they don’t try to compare a pickup to a minivan to a high powered sports car.</p>

<p>Again, I get that people like you and a lot of others use these rankings as a guide to explore, as opposed to an end unto themselves. I just feel that given how different choosing where to go to college is from buying a car, with far more impact on the rest of one’s life, ranking systems do in fact cause harm and are largely dishonest. I think you could hear about those “other cars”, or in this case other schools, if instead they simply listed them by certain characteristics. I can understand Car & Driver wanting to make it sexier by claiming a “best”. I think for USNWR, Forbes and others to do it with colleges is just rather shameful.</p>

<p>I would also suggest that POIH and soozievt are talking past each other because of different definitions. POIH is saying that even dividing things into reach/match/safety is a ranking system, while soozie is saying that is a classification system for a certain utility. Soozievt is saying that ranking systems are those things that use specific formulae and have things detailed down to differentiating #22 from #23. I happen to agree with soozie, but you two should either agree on a definition or at least admit you are talking about two different things.</p>

256

<p>By the way, POIH, not that my D picked her grad school on rankings, if you were to view the rankings for grad schools in architecture, MIT was ranked second that year, over all the Ivies except Harvard. When selecting grad schools for a field, typically one doesn’t go by Ivy as “best” but more which school is well regarded for that field of study and then meets various other personal selection criteria. Ivy is not always ranked “best” for certain grad fields. And for undergrad for my D2, for a BFA in MT, Ivy would never be on a list of schools, and the so called “most prestigious” programs are not necessarily located within prestigious or highly selective universities.</p>

257

<p>fallenchemist, I do think POIH and I are talking about two different things but he doesn’t think we are. I don’t see a typical student’s college list that is broken into reaches/matches/safeties or else favorite pile, less favored pile, back up pile that I like as being a ranking really as it is picking from thousands of colleges. If one is using published rankings or “Ivies” or something called “Ivies+” to select from, then they are picking from tippy top ranked schools only. That is not the same as someone compiling a college list in a range of selectivity, even if very selective (if a strong student) schools, from a much broader range of schools based on various selection criteria (size, location, particular major ,particular EC offerings, etc.) One way starts with published rankings and says “only pick from Ivies or something called Ivy+ or top 15 schools” and the other way picks from a wide assortment of colleges that narrows down due to certain things the student wants in a college, no matter how that college is ranked on USNews or whether it is called Ivy or something called Ivy+ (what is Ivy+?).</p>

258

<p>In curm’s case, I can see that the rankings (top 50?) was a starting point for exploration and for his D, she considered and applied to a myriad of schools that were not all in the top 20 or all Ivy or Ivy+, etc. In fact, she selected to attend a college not in the top 20 or some such over having been admitted to Yale. I don’t consider curm’s D as having selected her college based on PUBLISHED rankings. Everyone, however, ranks their own college list into “favorites” and “less favored but like.” </p>

<p>USNews is a useful resource in that it contains a lot of comparable information and data and I see nothing wrong with using it for that purpose.</p>

259

<p>fc, I guess we disagree. I certainly don’t find rankings as harmful if they are understood and used properly. </p>

<p>Maybe it’s like a gun. If its in my hand, its a useful tool because I know how to use it, understand the dangers, and wouldn’t dare touch it if I was drunk. ;)</p>

<p>I certainly admit that in less capable hands, a gun could be harmful. So, on this thread I’ve tried to offer some guidance on how to use the rankings and, more to the point, the info that goes into the rankings.</p>

260

<p>DD chose against rankings. She was really interested in women’s colleges and chose Barnard (27) over Wellesley (5?) Smith (around 15) and Mt. Holyoke (around 20) because she found the atmosphere much more intellectual (to her) and the proximity of a research university and great city were irresistible. Choosing by ranking would have been beside the point for her, and she had a wonderful experience.</p>

<p>Since half her classes were at Columbia, which is fairly typical, the 27 ranking was especially silly.</p>

<p>DS is at Williams. The ranking intimidated him. He almost chose Vassar because the ranking felt like pressure, but the situation in the mountains didn’t.</p>

<p>We like numbers. We like quantification. We like brands. Sometimes expressing data as a simple number that can be ranked helps; sometimes it doesn’t.</p>

<p>Thank goodness we can’t rank our potential mates. Some people would be very sad and others very happy, probably without much reason because many of those categories would be arbitrary or misguided.</p>