Harvard, MIT, Cambridge, Berkeley & Stanford are the top 5 in the world

[genome]

<p>Everybody loves ranking. It’s borne out of curiosity. Man made all of these; Hierarchy, classification, taxonomy, tabulation, organization and …
Forbe list of world wealthiest men came out recently. Do I care? nah, Am I curious who’s on Top? Hell …yeah<br>
@irmjunior, I couldn’t agree more on that. You’re dead right. Whatever floats your boat. </p>

<p>Besides, if you are one of the geniuses, your name could become University in the future. Einstein University for instance.</p>

[anonamous]

<p>edit…</p>

[MmeZeeZee]

<p>

No, by the article’s comparing of universities to the likes of Coca-cola, Nike, and Pepsi, “brand value” appears to be how much consumer product you can sell.</p>

<p>For example, USC has capitalized on its “brand value” and sells a variety of sports apparel bearing the university’s name.

</p>

<p>Wow, that’s even more useless in terms of academics. I’d assume that brand value in that sense hardly changes according to academics. The Ivy League’s existence as an athletic, not academic, conference brings to mind the essentially athletic nature of branding in that case.</p>

<p>Silly, if you ask me! Again, rankings have a place and can be useful especially for research (papers published, etc.) but this is just useless.</p>

[b_r_um]

<p>

As far as being defined as a “good school”, many / most mildly reputable schools in the U.S. provide relatively equal quality of education.

I couldn’t disagree more. For upper-level math courses at least, the caliber of the students in the room makes a HUGE difference in terms of how the courses are taught.</p>

[b_r_um]

<p>

No, by the article’s comparing of universities to the likes of Coca-cola, Nike, and Pepsi, “brand value” appears to be how much consumer product you can sell.</p>

<p>For example, USC has capitalized on its “brand value” and sells a variety of sports apparel bearing the university’s name.

Wow, that’s even more useless in terms of academics. I’d assume that brand value in that sense hardly changes according to academics. The Ivy League’s existence as an athletic, not academic, conference brings to mind the essentially athletic nature of branding in that case.</p>

<p>Silly, if you ask me! Again, rankings have a place and can be useful especially for research (papers published, etc.) but this is just useless.

Geez, did anybody actually care to read the methodology? The reputation ranking is based on a survey of “more than 13,000 experienced academics worldwide”, who were asked to name up to 10 universities which they would consider “the best” in their field in terms of research and instruction.</p>

<p>The Times is comparing academic reputation to corporate brand value to sell its rankings, but that’s not how they came up with the rankings.</p>

[Lemaitre1]

<p>Tokyo University, like all Japanese universities, is not particularly hard to graduate from once you get in but getting in is brutal. Have you ever seen the math section of the Tokyo University School of Science and Engineering Entrance Exam. I doubt the average student accepted to MIT or Cal Tech could do even one of the problems. The very top applicants to MIT and Cal Tech might get a few, but not nearly enough to be admitted, correct.</p>

[b_r_um]

<p>Are there sample questions online somewhere? I could only find questions for the general University Entrance Center Examination, which seemed pretty straight forward.</p>

<p><a href=“http://www.maa.org/juee/[/url]”>http://www.maa.org/juee/&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

[MmeZeeZee]

<p>"The Times is comparing academic reputation to corporate brand value to sell its rankings, but that’s not how they came up with the rankings. "</p>

<p>No, I only read the Times article, unfortunately. I think comparing brand recognition to those indicators is silly. Glad to hear they used actual peer estimation.</p>