JHU vs. the ivies

<p>confidentialcoll, I did read your post, but apparently you did not read mine. I was also adding up the 25th percentile and 75 percentile for each section. The difference between Dartmouth and JHU is negligible, as is the difference between Dartmouth and Harvard. The figures you provided were wrong, mine are right.</p>

<p>But as I said above, what separates universities are their faculties, curriculae as a result of the quality and size of that faculty and the resources availlable to that faculty.</p>

<p>

Actually, on its admissions web site, Penn releases the 25th and 75th percentiles of SAT and ACT scores for ENROLLED students, and not admitted students:</p>

<p>[Penn</a> Admissions: Incoming Class Profile](<a href=“http://www.admissions.upenn.edu/profile/]Penn”>http://www.admissions.upenn.edu/profile/)</p>

<p>And, as I previously indicated, these stats are available for ENROLLED students for ALL schools on collegeboard.com. No need to resort to the disparate averages and medians for ADMITTED students found in campus newspaper articles shortly after acceptances are released in the spring.</p>

<p>^^45, We are arguing different points. I knew the difference for enrolled students although as Alex said, it is pretty minor. I was arguing that the root of the problem for JHU is yield which can be fixed by increasing financial aid and aggressive recruiting.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>This seems to be a common tactic by haters of the non-hyp ivies…as if there is no difference in prestige, scholarship, selectivity, job and grad placements, etc. from these ivies and a school like Tufts, Brandeis, etc. I find it hilarious…</p>

<p>This thread is such a mess.</p>

<p>To the OP: YES. Hopkins is as good as any of the non-HYP ivies in many ways. Not all schools at the top are perfectly balanced, but the fact that they surpass each other in various fronts helps make them that much more roundly equal.
For example, I could easily say that a student who wanted to study Biology, BME, Neuroscience, and/or wanted to get research experience and/or work with the top doctors/scientists will find no better school to pick than Johns Hopkins. The same can be said for aspiring writers, IR people, etc.
On the other hand, if business and economics is your thing, perhaps Dartmouth or UPenn would be a better option, though, once again, their econ departments aren’t exactly steps ahead of JHU’s (more like inches), while of course, their networking would be better.
Overall, all things considered, these schools are equal. You will not get a marked advantage over someone else in another peer school JUST because you went to the school. I have plenty of friends who went to Harvard even, and aren’t doing as well as I am, even though we have similarly high GPAs.
There are a LOT of cross admits between schools of this caliber and in the end, its up to the student to decide which schools they want to go to based on factors like location, faculty, financial aid, etc. The fact that JHU has a higher acceptance rate than Dartmouth or UPenn or Brown doesn’t make it a worse school, it just means its appeal is not as strong as that of the other three (as noticed by comparing yields, and due in large part to myths and/or Baltimore stereotyping), but even then, the difference is negligible as student statistical quality is similar or the same. For YEARS UChicago had an acceptance rate hovering from 70% to 45%, and yet everyone knew it was just as good as any of the other elite schools.</p>

<p>I will say, however, that amongst the non-hyp ivies, and factoring in schools like Duke, Georgetown, etc, JHU has one of the strongest faculties across the board, whether in english, IR, or the sciences. I would say judging on faculty alone, it is comparable to Columbia, UChicago and Cornell as being marginally higher than the other non-hypsmc (and berkeley) schools, though of course, the faculties at the other schools are great as well.</p>

<p>the “resources” thing really just depends on how you slice it. It might mean the school has less to spend on financial aid and recruiting, but JHU makes up a lot for this difference in operating expenses with federal research dollars to build labs, interest faculty etc (instead of depending on endowment). It’s annual expenses can rival or surpass just about any other school out there, and students get a lot of the benefits that come with these expenditures. Also, if you were smart, you would know that endowment doesn’t mean much because most of it is legally tied down and unusable regardless. I really didn’t know about this stark difference until I had the chance to work in a lab at another prestigious university and noticed how much less advanced it was compared to the lab I dissected drosophila in at the JHU undergrad campus.</p>

<p>and sorry for hurting any poor aspiring dartmouth or upenny high-schoolers feelings, but this is the truth, and you’ll realize this when you start competing for positions in grad schools and no one bats an eye that you graduated from so-and-so school because there are a hundred other equally qualified people from schools that are considered just as good if not better.</p>

<p>“…strongest faculties across the board…”</p>

<p>this is one assessment tool, perhaps:
[NRC</a> Rankings](<a href=“NRC Rankings”>NRC Rankings)</p>

<p>monydad, that report is, what, more than a decade old?</p>

<p>I based my findings on the 2007-2008 charts by Academic Analytics which takes faculty productivity, awards, journal entries, citations, published, etc. into consideration. normal people used to have access to the charts, and I remember JHU being in the top 10 or top 5 on that overall chart, with several placements in the top 5 or top 3 in fields ranging from the humanities, art history, to the sciences like cell biology, bme, etc. The website has since made the information private and mostly (though not only) available to the institutions that it ranks as a sort of “insiders” report</p>

<p>I also remember that on that ranking, JHU was the second most cited US university in the world after Harvard (i think…this is from a year back when I was looking it up)</p>

<p>The chonicle also has several compartive charts listing JHU as top 10 or top 5 in multiple fields spanning just about all of its schools: [The</a> Chronicle: Faculty Scholarly Productivity Index](<a href=“http://chronicle.com/stats/productivity/page.php?year=2007&institution=1591&byinst=Go]The”>http://chronicle.com/stats/productivity/page.php?year=2007&institution=1591&byinst=Go) and <a href=“http://chronicle.com/stats/productivity/page.php?year=2006&institution=1591&byinst=Go[/url]”>http://chronicle.com/stats/productivity/page.php?year=2006&institution=1591&byinst=Go&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

<p>this info, I would say, is a little more up to date than that old NRC ranking.</p>

<p>Just to add a fact that not too many people know:</p>

<p>JHU’s history program is one of the best in the country. Its PhD program in history is the oldest in the country and it’s consistently ranked a top 10 program. The faculty are nearly second to none.</p>

<p>Not too people know this because of JHU’s powerhouse med reputation.</p>

<p>I would say people should stop pulling out that old NRC ranking, really. It was started in, what, 1993? or 1995? in that time, the endowments of all of these top schools have at the very least doubled, the hiring of professors/faculty/etc have changed, and the landscape is extremely different at a lot of schools. New programs have been created, previous programs have been gotten rid of, etc. Yes, the NRC rankings are a good guide…but for the 1990s.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>to add to that, Hopkins has a fantastic French program that is (I’m not sure if I’m remembering this correctly) one of only 3 programs recommended by the French National Higher Education Board or something as recommended American university programs teaching French. Their romance language programs in Italian have also gotten similar praise.</p>

<p>The english department also has many strong merits in literature analysis and critique and other fields.</p>

<p>The Art History program is also highly rated. Having placed in the top spot for Faculty Scholarly Productivity and in other rankings by art history organizations too, beating out favorites like NYU and Columbia. </p>

<p>Anyways, I think the general consensus can be that while JHU’s well regarded, rightfully, for the sciences, it is underrated by the general public and many high schoolers in fields in the humanities and social sciences where it has had a tradition of being small, but rigorous and high achieving at unusual levels beyond that of many peer schools.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>I think they are still useful as a guide to faculty strength across broad areas (e.g. the humanities or social sciences in general). Those strengths are unlikely to change even after a decade or more. You would not want to use them to make fine distinctions among peer schools for individual departments (but you really should not do that even for up-to-date rankings). </p>

<p>The NRC ranks many individual departments that US News does not (e.g. Linguistics, Anthropology). These rankings are based on peer assessments, a very different approach from citation-based studies such as Academic Analytics. The two approaches have complementary strengths and weaknesses, so I don’t think citation studies are clearly a modern replacement for peer assessments.</p>

<p>

Interesting link. Examining the fields I’m familiar with, those rankings seem to vary in accuracy as a gauge for department quality. Some are at least 75% right and pretty on the mark (religion, Middle Eastern studies, fisheries management), some are at least 50% right and moderately accurate (art history, zoology, botany, ecology), and some are ludicrously wide of the mark (ancient studies, gender studies, oceanography, anthropology, and especially philosophy).</p>