Little ivies???

College Search & Selection
41

<p>Ivy_grad, I disagree with you on several levels.</p>

<p>1) MIT is not purely an Engineering school. They are:</p>

<h1>1 in Linguistics</h1>

<h1>1 in Economics</h1>

<h1>1 in Computer Science</h1>

<h1>1 in Mathematics</h1>

<h1>1 in Physics</h1>

<p>Top 3 in Chemistry
Top 3 in Business (undergrad)
Top 3 in Geology
Top 5 in Biology
Top 10 in Philosophy
Top 10 in Political Science
Top 20 in Psychology</p>

<p>I would say a student can get an amazing Liberal Arts education at MIT, given the healthy mix of top notch departments in Economics, Mathematics, Philosophy, Political Science and Psychology. But I did not realize that the greatness of a university was directly linked to its Liberal Arts education. I thought a university's excellence was contigent on several factors, such as resources, ties to industry, research, curriculum, quality of departments, quality of faculty etc...</p>

<p>So yes, Stanford and MIT are definitely better than most Ivies and as good as H,P and Y. </p>

<p>2) As far as Cal goes, you do not want me to list the number of top 5 departments. You DO NOT want me to, trust me. Cal is better than all Ivies save H,P and Y. Like it, hate it, I don't really care, industry and academe know it and accept it, so deal with it.</p>

<p>3) With regards to Michigan, I am tired of arguing, so I will not bother. Even if you remove Michigan from the equation, there are still a number of brilliant universities that are non Ivy (like Chicago, Duke, Johns Hopkins, CalTech and Northwestern) but that are just as good as the majority of the Ivies (Penn, Brown, Cornell, Columbia and Dartmouth). </p>

<p>4) Then you have other great private research universities that are practically as good. Schools like Rice, Washington University, Georgetown, Carnegie Mellon, Emory and Vanderbilt. </p>

<p>5) I have no even started discussing LACs. In academe and industry, schools like Amherst, Carleton, Middlebury, Pomona, Swarthmore, Wellesley, Wesleyan and Williams are certainly regarded as highly as the Ivies. </p>

<p>Ivy_grad, I find it funny that you cling so tightly and think so highly of a student poll and yet, wish to ignore a University presdient, deans of admission and university professor poll. I guess the impressionable and inexperienced masses are easier to manipulate than the powerful few who really can impact the life of a student.</p>

42

<p>Alexandre, </p>

<p>First, we have now successfully hijacked this thread which is a complete shame.</p>

<p>But to address your counterpoints:</p>

<p>1) First, what is the source of these rankings? USNWR no doubt? (please see my comments on this below). Second, do you live and die by a certain set of rankings? Third, let's analyze that long laundry list there - let's see here: Mathamatics, Computer Science, Physics, Chemistry, Biology, Geology - sounds like you've got a leading institution in the maths / sciences, i.e. = a leading engineering school, just as I said. Thanks for inadvertently supporting my own claim, you make it so easy.</p>

<p>
[quote]
I would say a student can get an amazing Liberal Arts education at MIT

[/quote]
</p>

<p>I never said that a student wouldn't. Please do not distort my words. My reference to a liberal arts education was in your claims that an MIT liberal arts education is BETTER than more than half the Ivies. Complete rubbish. In fact your quote (above) almost concedes this fact "I would say a student CAN get" - yes they CAN, but that wasn't the point was it? That was half the story. The other half is what mattered (i.e. in comparison to the other Ivies). Like I said, MIT = to Ivies. Certainly can accept that. MIT better than MORE THAN HALF? Gotta call total B.S. there.</p>

<p>
[quote]
But I did not realize that the greatness of a university was directly linked to its Liberal Arts education. I thought a university's excellence was contigent on several factors, such as resources, ties to industry, research, curriculum, quality of departments, quality of faculty etc...

[/quote]
</p>

<p>This is exactly why rankings such as USNWR are so fundamentally flawed. Large research oriented universities are of course going to get national recognition. But let's get real for a second, the average incoming freshmen at that large U - how does he/she benefit from that? What % of these resources and $$$ go to the undergrads? What % of these resources and $$$ go to the PhD's and faculty busy trying to get published? Compare that to colleges that are largely dominated by the undergraduate programs (e.g. Dartmouth, Brown, Princeton) where the % of resources and $$$ will go to the undergrads - where you are going to be taught by the Professor in a more intimate environment instead of by being taught largely by some teaching assistant b/c the Professor is busy handing the graduate students and / or his/her own research.</p>

<p>2) Cal.</p>

<p>
[quote]
Cal is better than all Ivies save H,P and Y. Like it, hate it, I don't really care, industry and academe know it and accept it, so deal with it.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>No, when it comes to your so called "claims" I don't accept anything you say with regards to "XYZ Public U is better than the Ivies". Like it, hate it, I don't really care. So deal with that. Your argument is the equivalent of saying "I'm right because I say so." Very convincing. For a 5 year old.</p>

<p>3) Michigan.</p>

<p>
[quote]
Even if you remove Michigan

[/quote]
</p>

<p>OMG! Will miracles never cease! So you admit and concede that your "Michigan = Ivy" claim is just flat out nonsense. Thank you. At least I feel we have accomplished something.</p>

<ol>
<li>Research U's.</li>
</ol>

<p>
[quote]
4) Then you have other great private research universities that are practically as good. Schools like Rice, Washington University, Georgetown, Carnegie Mellon, Emory and Vanderbilt.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Please refer to my comments in point 1. Again, you are mixing apples and oranges. To take for instance Wash U's strong national reputation in grad programs (such as its leading medical program) and then use that as a basis to say you are going to necessarily get a leading liberal arts education there. Yes you will likely get a fine liberal arts education, but you cannot take one facet of an institution and then trade off of those credentials in every other area. </p>

<p>So yes, if one has aspirations for grad level work, get a PhD, do leading research, then ABSOLUTELY - the RESEARCH U's are the best - Hence the name "research" U's. But you have to ask yourself, how many incoming freshman are there to get a good solid liberal arts education and how many are there to begin cracking on that dissertation outlining groundbreaking methods in gene splicing which is destined to be published by the New England Journal of Medicine?</p>

<p>5) LACs. I haven't begun discussing this in earnest either. </p>

<p>Alexandre, I find it funny that you cling so tightly and think so highly of very specific facets of a fundementally flawed USNWR and go around pretending as though these things are carved in stone from up on high.</p>

43

<p>I am not conceding anything. Michigan's presence in this debate is imaterial. The point was that there are more excellent universities that are non-Ivies than that are Ivies. </p>

<p>To answer your question about whether I live or die by a certain set of rankings...the answer is a resounding no. In fact, I have done my own studies on the subject, so I am not blindly following nor am I completely clueless on the subject. But I am more likely to trust reliable rankings than high school student poll.</p>

<p>The USNWR is not that great a ranking...I never claimed it was. But the Peer assessment rating is actually as close to an accurate gauge as you are going to get. Thousands of top academics from around the country offer their knowledge of educational institutions and that cannot be taken lightly. It may not be 100% accurate, but it is the closest thing to it. </p>

<p>But, since you insist, I will include Michigan in the debate. </p>

<p>1) Cal, MIT and Stanford = Havard, Princeton and Yale. Students at those orgsanizations have resources availlable to them that are unavaillable to students at any other university in the country. Whether they take the initiative to pursue them and leverage them is up to the student. You simply cannot force feed any adult university-level information...a student must have the desire to buckle down and get dirty. Education is not for the weak. We both know how much one must sacrifice to succeed at any good university.</p>

<p>2) CalTech, Chicago, Duke, Johns hopkins, Michigan and Northwestern = Brown, Columbia, Cornell, Dartmouth and Penn. Those schools are not identical mind you. CalTech is tiny and purely a science institute. Michigan, as you are so fond of pointing out, is a state university. But as academic institutions, all of them are brilliant.</p>

<p>3) Carngie Mellon, Emory, Georgetown, Rice, UCLA, UNC, UVA, Vanderbilt, Washington U. are not quite as good, but they certainly aren't far behind either. I would recommend any of those over an Ivy League in a heartbeat if I felt a student was a better fit at any of those schools.</p>

<p>4) LACs cover the entire spectrum. Some, like Amherst, Bowdoin, Carleton, Haverford, Middlebury, Pomona, Swarthmore, Wellesley, Weselyan and Williams are as respected as the Ivies and the other schools listed in point #2 above. Others, like Davidson, Grinnell, Oberlin etc...are just a notch below, but still very highly regarded.</p>

<p>You clearly have an issue with state universities. I have been a student at both an elite state university and an Ivy League. I can tell you that there is no discernable difference between them...not in terms of quality, opportunities and not in the way people perceive them. My fellow students at Michigan were as gifted and as ambitious and came from a very similar backgrounds to the undergrads I had the priviledge of TAingand hanging out with at Cornell. And in my experience, recruiters and executives at major companies accross the geographic and industry spectrum have always been equally impressed by both, as have academics from various institutions.</p>

44

<p>Ivy_grad - you seem very condescending and snobby in the way you analyze these colleges and such. Even with your name, I can tell you are quite an elitist. But wtvr floats your boat, have fun.</p>

45

<p>and btw, I agree with Alexandre much more on this subject. Ivies are not on a completely different level compared with publics and many other private universities.</p>

46

<p>I don't wanna interrupt, but what's with this self-contradiction of yours?
I have read many of your posts saying that UVA is 'as good as' Michigan... and now you say UVA is not quite at that level?
And based on the rankings, average SATs, HS GPA's, etc., Michigan is definitely not a superior to UVA. </p>

<p>I don't wish to be a weenie, but I had to point out. The reason people group Berkeley, Michigan, and UVA as being top 3 state schools is that the difference in qualities at these institutions is negligible.</p>

47

<p>Int'l85, the difference in quality between Michigan and UVA is indeed negligible. The main difference is that Michigan is stronger in most fields of study. But UVA's student body and approach to education are as good as Michigan's. Overall, I can see how some would argue that UVA is better. I personally think Michigan has the edge, but at least there is room to debate the point.</p>

48

<p>This is a rather pointless exercise. I'm not going to change your mind, and you certainly aren't going to change mine.</p>

<p>I understand your staunch loyalty to your undergrad institution, in fact I would applaud it if you weren't supposed to be a "non-partisan" participant. In this sense, I believe that I have just as much right to defend my own position countering your "Ivies are way overrated" claims.</p>

<p>So, go on and believe that Michigan is = to an Ivy institution. </p>

<p>In your world, if you gave 100 incoming Michigan freshman a free option to switch their places for their choice of enrolling at: Columbia, Penn, Brown, Dartmouth or Cornell (according to you) 100% of these students should turn down this option and enroll at Michigan (why switch if they are all equal). If anyone believes that the outcome would be anywhere near 100% (heck over 50% would be impressive)... you've got me. </p>

<p>I hate to tell you this but out of the close circle of friends I went to school with (all of whom went onto either Ivy or S) more than half applied to Michigan as their safety (I did not apply to a safety, I applied to Princeton early). Why? Because of its rolling admissions policy (giving successful applicants an early piece of mind) and, yes, because it is also an excellent institution (with a relatively lower admissions standard vis a vis Ivies). But they didn't for a minute believe that an acceptance there was equivalent to an Ivy spot.</p>

49

<p>As someone who is NOT an ivy grad...(I can tell you all about the art school process) was an ivy education THAT beneficial to you or if the fit of one of the "little ivies" was better, you would recommend a small LAC over the ivy experience. As a parent of a child that was recommended to apply to the ivies, I feel that the LAC's actually may offer a better environment for what my D is interested in achieving. However, do you say, if you are lucky enough to gain admittance into a spectacular "name" school, take the chance and run with it?</p>

50

<p>Ivy_grad, I do not recall ever saying the Ivies are "overrated". My exact words were:</p>

<p>"...it is pretty evident that the Ivy league's reputation is overstated in this site. The Ivies are a group of great universities...8 of the top 40 colleges and universities in the nation. But there are 30 or so other colleges and universities that are just as good...".</p>

<p>There is a difference between overrated and overstated. I always say that the Ivies are great. I always rank all 8 of them among the top 15 research universities.</p>

<p>You seem to return to how many of your friends applied to Michigan as a saftey but that not one of them considered going there. That may well be. Maybe you come from a community/high school that does not believe in the quality of public education. I personally know many people (myself included) who turned down Ivies to go to Michigan. In fact, when you consider that a third of Michigan students have SAT scores over 1400, you can pretty much be sure than a large portion of Michigan students picked Michigan over an Ivy. Ivies are not unique from an academic excellence and reputation stand point and they certainly aren't the right fit for everybody.</p>

<p>One thing we can agree upon is that we are not going to convince each other of anything.</p>

<p>And by the way Ivy_grad, I am extremely neutral. It is well documented that I always praise good universities, no matter what. Your constant insinuations that I am biased simply because I went to Michigan is insulting. I do not recall having insulted you.</p>

51

<p>No he's not. He's simply addressing something that has been a trend with the posts of a "moderator."</p>

52

<p>Hoo, first of all we haven't "met" as you claim. Secondly, you have me confused with someone who actually cares what you think. Thirdly, calling anyone a "loser" on this site only serves to highlight the fact that you lack the mental capacity to express your opinion in a compelling and/or articulate manner and must resort to name calling. </p>

<p>I feel sorry for you. I really do.</p>

<p>Alexandre, if you feel I have insulted / offended you personally with my posts, you have my sincere apologies. I felt that we were engaging in a spirited debate, but if you have taken personal offense to them, I want to be the first to say that this was never my intention. I just wanted to be able to counter some of your claims / comments which I have read on more than one occassion throughout this forum.</p>

53

<p>Ivy grad, how can I not be offended? You attack my partiality (I take my neutrality very seriously) and your tone is condescending. I do not mind debating...we can engage in a spirited debate about colleges without insulting each other or the universities we discuss. </p>

<p>At any rate, debating this matter further is pointless since we argeed that we cannot agree. </p>

<p>Apology accepted.</p>

54

<p>Alexandre, one thing I've learned over the years is that strong opinions usually evoke strong reactions. You also have very strong opinions on certain matters. </p>

<p>
[quote]
Cal is better than all Ivies save H,P and Y. Like it, hate it, I don't really care, industry and academe know it and accept it, so deal with it.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>I'd say statements like that are pretty strong (not to mention the fact that such statements are hardly impartial) - with very little room for debate. But just because you take such a strong position doesn't mean you are right nor does it discount my right to challenge your position. On the contrary, I feel I have duty to at least put such extreme views up for debate.</p>

<p>So let's be fair here - just because you are a moderator does not make you infallible. Last time I checked, this was a forum for discussion and debate. You have made certain claims and, frankly, should not be surprised to be challenged on them.</p>

<p>Next, when did I ever INSULT an institution? Just because I think ABC is better than XYZ? This is done all the time, everyday on this site, and you fall victim to this very same charge. We all have opinions on certain institutions. We all "rank" them in our own way. But just because I think that a certain institution is better than another - that - that is insulting that other institution? Get real.</p>

<p>Finally, you sight my constant references to Michigan as a personal attack. It's absolutely not. I don't know you and you don't know me. I do, however, have opinions on the institution, U of M, and so do you. You are the one who has constantly claimed that this school is equal to the Ivies. Now I ask you, if your claims re: Michigan are challenged, does that automatically make it a personal attack on you? And if it does, that says absolutely nothing about the University of Michigan, however, it does say something about you.</p>

55

<p>"I understand your staunch loyalty to your undergrad institution, in fact I would applaud it if you weren't supposed to be a "non-partisan" participant..." </p>

<p>That sounds like an attack on my ethics. </p>

<p>Ivy Grad, you are entitled to your opinion. I personally do not mind opinions. What constitutes an ideal university is open to debate. That is why there are so many top universities. But your tone is condescending and your insinuations are offensive.</p>

56

<p>"My fellow students at Michigan were as gifted and as ambitious and came from a very similar backgrounds to the undergrads I had the priviledge of TAingand hanging out with at Cornell."</p>

<p>I don't doubt this at all, but some points of clarification:</p>

<p>1) You were never an undergrad at Cornell. You were a grad student, and for only two years.
2) MY own experience as a grad student at Cornell was drastically different from my experience as an undergrad there. Undergrad was far more demanding.
3) You attended the ILR school, which is part of the State University of New York System. You attended a state university at Michigan, and a state university at Cornell.
4) Cornell's specialized SUNY branch colleges are all absolutely tops at what they do. I have known a number of outstanding graduates of the ILR school,and the College of Agriculture as well. but nevertheless it is typically the case that admissions qualification numbers for ILR students, and the other SUNY-branch colleges, as a group are perceptibly below those of students at Cornell's College of Arts and Sciences.
5) I knew no Arts & Sciences students who took ILR courses, and I believe the number who do so is small. The ILR curriculum was insular and quite specialized when I was there. Did you TA any classes taught in the Arts & Sciences college, with predominantly Arts & Sciences students? Which one?
6) The ILR school is outstanding at what it does. However, I doubt anybody at Cornell would say that it is in any way representative of the University. No college can claim to represent it really, but ILR, as one of the very smallest, most specialized colleges, has less claim than most. The Colleges of Arts & Sciences, Engineering, and Agriculture all dwarf the ILR school, I believe.
7) When the public at large is having these sort of discussions, comparing Cornell to other different types of colleges, it is invariably the Arts & Sciences college that they have in their minds, not the state-supported colleges. Not the SUNY College of Industrial and Labor Relations, for sure.
8) Grad students, at least when I attended, typically did not live in undergrad dorms. Their whole experience there was different than undergrads. In part because they are older and have their heads in a different place, as well.
9) I personally found the highest levels of excellence at Cornell in its science departments. I'm not sure ILR students even take science. If any of them take it beyond the most elementary level I'd be surprised.</p>

<p>Frankly I've been squirming every time I read you making global pronouncements about what Cornell is or isn't like, based on being a grad student in ILR for two years. I'm thinking "how would you know", given that particular distorted vantage point.</p>

57

<p>Monydad, you are right on the money...no pun intended! hehe But I did have a lot of interaction with undergraduate students. Some took graduate level classes and others, I knew as their TA. I TAd two classes while at Cornell. And the ILR school may be public, but it is as selective as the other colleges at Cornell. </p>

<p><a href="http://dpb.cornell.edu/irp/pdf/FactBook/Admissions/Undergraduate/Freshmen/bycoll.pdf%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://dpb.cornell.edu/irp/pdf/FactBook/Admissions/Undergraduate/Freshmen/bycoll.pdf&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

<p><a href="http://www.ilr.cornell.edu/admissions/downloads/ProfileClass2008.pdf%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.ilr.cornell.edu/admissions/downloads/ProfileClass2008.pdf&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

<p>Secondly, I also took 3 classes (on Econ, one History and one Physics) in the regular college. I actually did that as an extra mural student, before starting my ILR education...just for the fun of it. While an ILR student, I took two classes at the Hotel School. So I actually have a very comprehensive knowledge of Cornell. </p>

<p>Obviously, I am not very knowledgeable about Cornell, which explains why I shy away from the Cornell forum...but I do know Cornell well enough to discuss my experience there and how it compares to Michigan.</p>

58

<p>Taking 3 classes outside of ILR does not give you a "very comprehensive knowledge of Cornell." Your 2 years at Cornell only makes you qualified to discuss your experiences about ILR and compare it to Michigan. You make many comparisons about the quality and breadth of Engineering/Science/Humanities to those of Michigan and if someone questions your stance, you respond with "I went to Cornell, I know what I'm talking about."</p>

<p>In the past, you have made many many statements about employment and post-graduate opportunities available to Cornell and other Ivy students. I'm an engineer at Cornell. I have no right to compare ILR to similar programs at other institutions. I am unqualified to do so because my only experiences of ILR comes from friends who are in the school. However, I am qualified to talk about the opportunities available to Cornell engineers and scientists and compare them to other schools. Why? I have experience not only with Cornell, but with colleagues and faculty from other schools and with many employers.</p>

<p>Frankly, I'm dismayed by your spin in these types of discussions. The point of these forums are to provide neutral guidance to impressionable high schoolers who are making a big decision in their lives.</p>

59

<p>That is correct Shizz. And I admit it. I am not very knowledgeable about Cornell...which explains why do I offer help to students who seek to apply to Cornell or chose between Cornell and other schools. I do know enough about Cornell, however, to describe it generally and compare it to other peer institutions.</p>

60

<p>Personally I have no issue when you post about,eg, the quality of Cornell's collegetown vs. Michigan's, or whatever. You have as much perspective to make these comparisons as anybody.</p>

<p>Where I get concerned is when I see comments like the one I quoted above. Because it is not apparent to me that you really spent sufficient time with the best and brightest of Cornell's undergraduate student body to validly draw those types of conclusions. Aside from the numerically insignificant and statistically lower ILR school, of which I fully defer to you.</p>

<p>And yes the state colleges often have similar acceptance percentages to the endowed colleges, but the applicant pool of people with such specialized interests, largely residing in just New York State, is typically weaker as a whole than the applicants to the College of Arts & Sciences. This in no way detracts from the excellence of the state schools in carrying out their respective missions; they generally rank higher in their respective fields than many Arts college departments do. But statistically the best and brightest at Cornell are elsewhere to a good degree, and your time with those other students was somewhat limited I think, to be making broadbrush statements about the capabilities of THOSE students.</p>

<p>You may find some period of time where the, e.g., SAT numbers are extremely close between the state colleges vs. the larger endowed colleges, but over the years there has typically been an obviously discernable separation. Or at least there has been whenever I looked, and it was certainly a known fact when I attended.</p>