Is Dartmouth is a sub-standard school?

Student Lounge International Students
21

<p>Hey I was talking about undergrad not Phd programs. This is not a grad school forum. IF terms of grad school berkeley is better than dartmouth because they have a well run grad program. Dartmouth however takes superb undergrad students and gives them a great education.</p>

22

<p>Oh and when I said public I meant that berkeley might be selective but it stil must take a lot of students from california while i rejects more suitable and qualified candidates that are from out of state. It is very hard to get into berkeley if you are international or out of state but moderately difficult if you're from california.</p>

23

<p>
[quote]
It is very hard to get into berkeley if you are international or out of state but moderately difficult if you're from california.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Well I'm not quite sure about that. I think the biggest thing holding most internationals back is that they would have to pay the full $40-50k price-tag of attending. I'm sure most students can't afford that - I know I can't.</p>

<p>I do know someone from my area that got into Berkeley. Let's just say she isn't the brightest lightbulb of the bunch.</p>

24

<p>

That girl (int'l) who got into Berkeley wasn't the brightest light-bulb of the bunch...</p>

<p>That guy who got into Cambridge wasn't the brightest light-bulb of the bunch...</p>

<p>Big Brother 1984 got into Dartmouth and he is the brightest light-bulb of the bunch...</p>

25

<p>
[quote]
That girl (int'l) who got into Berkeley wasn't the brightest light-bulb of the bunch...</p>

<p>That guy who got into Cambridge wasn't the brightest light-bulb of the bunch...</p>

<p>Big Brother 1984 got into Dartmouth and he is the brightest light-bulb of the bunch...

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Ad hominem, framed.</p>

<p>There's nothing wrong with a little honesty. I admit fully that I didn't try as hard as I could have in my studies, so I deserved the offers that I got. My GPA/class rank was abysmal.</p>

<p>But I know my own anecdotes. And the fact of the matter is, that girl just did not stand out at all.</p>

26

<p>Big Brother, does the girl you are talking about go to a school in Toronto? Chinese? With initials MX?</p>

27

<p>No, I don't live in Toronto. She's white.</p>

28

<p>Oops, I thought you did...sorry.</p>

29

<p>

That's only because you keep on believing in the US News ranking that places Dartmouth so high up when it obviously doesn't deserve that standing</p>

<p>For your info, THES and Shanghai Jiaotong use completely different criteria, but they both agree that Berkeley is superb and Dartmouth is dismal.</p>

30

<p>

Erm... I got in Cornell and UCLA for US (rejected by UC Berkeley and Stanford. Somehow it appears that UC Berkeley is harder than all Ivies bar HYP for internationals.)</p>

<p>Anyway I am going to attend Imperial College, UK this coming autumn, as it is more prestigious than lower Ivies like Cornell. I would have certainly accepted UC Berkeley, however, if I was admitted.</p>

<p>Dartmouth? I didn't apply as it is quite an "unknown" school. I would probably reject Dartmouth for Cornell if I was rejected by Imperial College.</p>

31

<p>
[quote]
That's only because you keep on believing in the US News ranking that places Dartmouth so high up when it obviously doesn't deserve that standing</p>

<p>For your info, THES and Shanghai Jiaotong use completely different criteria, but they both agree that Berkeley is superb and Dartmouth is dismal.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Oh now look what you've done. You're trying to validate the legitimacy of these rankings, aren't you? Alright then, since you've invoked the THES, and the Jiaotong, I will too.</p>

<p>How can you explain then, that UT Austin ranks higher than a lot of the Ivies in both of the rankings you've pulled out. I guess to you, UT Austin is such a better school, and all of the people who turned it down for places like Dartmouth made the wrong choice, huh?</p>

<p>Listen, you don't have to go by the US News rankings. Believe me, I'm not asking you to. What I'm asking you to do is consider the unique characteristics that make each university successful. By the same virtue, don't invoke the THES and the Jiaotong.</p>

<p>
[quote]
Erm... I got in Cornell and UCLA for US (rejected by UC Berkeley and Stanford. Somehow it appears that UC Berkeley is harder than all Ivies bar HYP for internationals.)

[/quote]
</p>

<p>This doesn't exactly prove anything.</p>

<p>
[quote]
Anyway I am going to attend Imperial College, UK this coming autumn, as it is more prestigious than lower Ivies like Cornell. I would have certainly accepted UC Berkeley, however, if I was admitted.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>I think you should've chosen Cornell, but maybe you liked Imperial. I don't know. But to assume that Imperial is more prestigious? That's a pretty loaded statement.</p>

<p>
[quote]
Dartmouth? I didn't apply as it is quite an "unknown" school. I would probably reject Dartmouth for Cornell if I was rejected by Imperial College.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>If you're going into engineering, then this would be very reasonable. However, don't tell me that Dartmouth is an "unknown" school. Prestige-wise, Dartmouth has a stronger name than Cornell. You can ask my friends at Raffles Junior College if you don't believe me.</p>

32

<p>Why do people refer to Shanghai Jiaotong; It's even more crappy than THES.</p>

33

<p>Rankings , Prestige and being "unknown" is all relative criteria , the fact of the matter is some colleges will be obscure no matter how good they really are. Ultimately what it boils down to what kind of opportunity the college and the education provided by them helps you to achieve your goals as a student. Sounds pretty arty-farty , but thats the bottom line , Dartmouth whether you like to admit it or not does provide ample opportunities for its students , so does Berkeley , Cornell and Imperial. You might like to gloat at the fact that you have a certain college tag , but thats just a personal thing.</p>

34

<p>
[quote]
Rankings , Prestige and being "unknown" is all relative criteria , the fact of the matter is some colleges will be obscure no matter how good they really are.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>I would argue that prestige is an important market value indicator to employers, professions, etc. and that prestige and opportunities are more correlated than you would think. It just so happens that the THES and Jiaotong rankings don't really do a good job of documenting these market values.</p>

<p>
[quote]
the fact of the matter is some colleges will be obscure no matter how good they really are.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>I don't get this. Do you mean that some less regarded undergraduate programs out there are pretty good? If so, then I would agree with you. The University of Chicago's Mathematics curriculum is top notch, and probably far more rigorous than MIT's or Harvard's.</p>

<p>However, it helps to be at a prestigious school for better networking, opportunities, etc.</p>

<p>
[quote]
You might like to gloat at the fact that you have a certain college tag , but thats just a personal thing.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>I think this is more a virtue of economics. It's rational to choose the college with a better brand name. Berkeley and Cornell are excellent schools (I can't really say much about Imperial). But their market values can only be so much.</p>

35

<p>

That's what I call "over-valued" and "under-valued". If we know that Chicago Maths is top-notch (I thought Princeton's one is better), then it should be more regarded than MIT or Harvard. In this sense, MIT and Harvard Maths grads are "over-valued".</p>

<p>Like wise, I have been arguing for ages that any course at Dartmouth does not match that rigour of the equivalent courses at Caltech, and that's for the undergrads. For research, Dartmouth invariably loses out. So Dartmouth is way over-rated in US News and it should change places with UC Berkeley.</p>

<p>

Berkeley, Cornell and Imperial all are excellent schools and have great brand-names. They are, of course, at very different locations so it is very hard to compare across the board. From what I hear from you, there is a great discrepancy between the UG and PG programs at Berkeley. Cornell has a strong reputation but please note that it is not Princeton or Caltech for that matter. Reputation wise Imperial is slightly better than Cornell.</p>

36

<p>

Please get your facts right. When is UT Austin ranked ahead of many Ivies for THES?
THES 06
1 Harvard University
4= Yale University
10 Princeton University
12 Columbia University
13 Duke University
15 Cornell University
26 University of Pennsylvania
32 University of Texas at Austin
61= Dartmouth College
Don't feel sad my friend, but it seems that the only Ivy to be ranked below UT Austin is your beloved Dartmouth, and hence this thread. :D</p>

<p>

I don't particularly like any school. I just choose them base on their global reputation and career opportunities offered. I don't see why I should choose Cornell instead of Imperial. If that's HYPSM I would, but it is not.</p>

37

<p>
[quote]
That's where I disagree with you. Measuring university performance across the globe is no easy task. THES has done quite a nice job of fitting how the universities should be ranked together.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Well, you can believe what you want. But other posters on CC also have eyes and brains, and they can interpret what they see. They'll see UC Berkeley being ranked higher than Princeton, or Imperial being ranked higher than Princeton. How do you explain that? UC Berkeley is a great school but come on, at the undergraduate level, it's no Princeton.</p>

<p>I think what you're trying to say is that the THES is a valid ranking system. Most of us here aren't the biggest fans of rankings at all. But hey, you started the argument with them, so let's deal with them.</p>

<p>You also haven't answered my question about UT Austin being above Dartmouth. Are you going to tell me now that UT Austin is unequivocally, the better school?</p>

<p>Invoking the the rankings is very weak to begin with. But hey, if you're such a huge follower of them, then we'll all deal with them just for your sake. But first, answer the question above.</p>

<p>
[quote]
That's what I call "over-valued" and "under-valued". If we know that Chicago Maths is top-notch (I thought Princeton's one is better), then it should be more regarded than MIT or Harvard. In this sense, MIT and Harvard Maths grads are "over-valued".

[/quote]
</p>

<p>That isn't the case though. UChicago Math may be top notch, but MIT and Harvard aren't a walk in the park either, you know. Even though UChicago Math is top notch, we can all agree that the general student body population at Chicago is weaker than the ones at Harvard and MIT. Along with general prestige, Harvard and MIT are just better indicators of high market value.</p>

<p>Because let's face it, if you're an employer looking for top-notch employees, you'd like minimize your search costs, but still get good workers. So if you're McKinsey or Goldman Sachs, where would you go to get the best people who will take your job offers? At the Ivies or other top-tier schools. The fact stands that although UChicago has some great programs, it doesn't have as strong of a market value as say - most Ivy Leagues. It's called name branding.</p>

<p>But can you see how this would affect those MIT/Harvard math majors? Although their curriculum may not be as rigorous, those math majors can just ride under the MIT/Harvard brand name. Would you say that Coca Cola is "over-valued" compared to some no-name brand? But people would purchase Coca Cola anyways huh?</p>

<p>
[quote]
Like wise, I have been arguing for ages that any course at Dartmouth does not match that rigour of the equivalent courses at Caltech, and that's for the undergrads.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Hey, we can hear you. Nobody disputes that Caltech is far more difficult of a school than Dartmouth is. But for some reason, the Dartmouth name has a higher market value than Caltech, especially with regards to professional schools (most notoriously, med schools), iBankers, private equity firms, etc. So it can't be just the curriculum rigor now, can it?</p>

<p>I hate to keep bringing up anecdotes, but I think this one is very appropriate. There's a senior graduating this year from Caltech who applied to a wide variety of med schools. He got into none, and was waitlisted from the Duke and Dartmouth med schools - which means that he may not have gotten into any med school at all. IMO, I believe he was a far more qualified candidate than most of the pre-meds at Dartmouth. So why did he get shanked like that? It can't be just about Caltech having better academics now, can it?</p>

<p>
[quote]
For research, Dartmouth invariably loses out. So Dartmouth is way over-rated in US News and it should change places with UC Berkeley.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Well of course Dartmouth loses out in research - it is a de facto LAC after all. I also think UC Berkeley is a great school, but I don't think it's the 9th greatest school in the country either. Consider the undergraduate aspects. Berkeley loses out in post-graduate opportunities to Dartmouth. Berkeley has a long tail-end of unexceptional students (face it, a LOT of Berkeley students are unexceptional). I would actually argue that MORE undergraduate research happens at Dartmouth than at Berkeley. UCB, while a great school, isn't exactly the most personal place to get your education.</p>

<p>But let's face it, most undergraduate research just isn't that impressive anyways. Your cognitive bias focuses on the bigger things happening at these institutions, but does that really matter though?</p>

<p>
[quote]
From what I hear from you, there is a great discrepancy between the UG and PG programs at Berkeley.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>That's precisely what I'm saying. Berkeley graduate schools are top notch. The undergraduate program? Not even close to an all-star level. sakky has tons of posts detailing the problems with the administration at Berkeley. </p>

<p>
[quote]
Cornell has a strong reputation but please note that it is not Princeton or Caltech for that matter.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Uh...I never did say that Cornell has a stronger reputation than Caltech or Princeton. It might have a stronger market value than Caltech does though.</p>

<p>
[quote]
Reputation wise Imperial is slightly better than Cornell.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Oh I don't know about that. Reputation wise, most employers here won't have heard of Imperial.</p>

38

<p>
[quote]
Don't feel sad my friend, but it seems that the only Ivy to be ranked below UT Austin is your beloved Dartmouth, and hence this thread.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Oh believe me spencer. I know what I saw. Perhaps you should get your facts straight. Check out Brown University.</p>

<p>And what about Emory? Seoul National?</p>

<p>And Melbourne University ranked higher than Dartmouth? I actually have a friend from Australia who's coming to Dartmouth next year - over from Melbourne. What do you make of that?</p>

<p>These rankings fail to address the specific perceptions of most American college-bound seniors, and arguably most college-bound seniors from the rest of the world. Heck, Seoul National at 63? What are you, kidding me?</p>

39

<p>I also dare you to tell me, a Canadian, that the University of Toronto is better than Brown, Dartmouth, or Seoul National.</p>

<p>Come on, I dare you.</p>

40

<p>Erm... I got in Cornell and UCLA for US</p>

<p>Anyway I am going to attend Imperial College, UK this coming autumn, as it is more prestigious than lower Ivies like Cornell. I would have certainly accepted UC Berkeley, however, if I was admitted.</p>

<p>I dont know who youre kidding. Imperial takes EVERYONE in. There were 40 people who applied to imperial from my school. 38 got in, myself included. Only three are going, and all three were rejected by every american college they applied to. That is what imperial is worth. Oxbridge admissions are COMPARABLE to lower ivies. Cambridge and oxford arent harder to get in (they take in like 35 percent of all people who apply), they just don't give aid. And it depends a LOT on the program yo uapply for. Anthropology or somethign is easier to get into than u chicago, sciences are harder. But by harder i mean as hard to get into as an american ivy. I really don't know who youre kidding.</p>

<p>I disagree with the berkeley thing. Everyone at berkeley hates it there. Its the ONLY school (apart from chicago) that has students telling prospectives not to go there. That speaks volumes about the quality of life there. Though there are people who like challenges, the california sun, and hard-knock lifestyles. I guess they'd want to go to berkeley, but I really dont think they'd be 'happy' there. And at the end of the day isnt that what an undergrad education is about? giving you the most conducive environment to do your best.</p>

<p>A friend of mine used his cornell acceptance letter to (literally) wipe his @$$. I'm not saying cornells a bad school. On the contrary it blows imperial and even berkeley away. But its not something that gives you the right to put dartmouth down.</p>

<p>I think you've proved time and again that you really have no idea what youre talking about. Go off to imperial with your false illusions of grandeur, just so long as you promise never to come to establish any communication with the US (electronic or physical).</p>