most overrated/underrated college?

College Search & Selection
401

<p>
[quote]
Also, you should know that the US News rankings are for the entire schools and not just the undergraduate programs….

[/quote]
</p>

<p>That I did not realize. In that case, I wouldn't be willing to use their graduate program rankings.</p>

<p>
[quote]
So you’re telling me that your definition of a “better” school is one that produces more research?

[/quote]
</p>

<p>No. Research performed by those compiling the rankings, not research done by the universities.</p>

<p>
[quote]
SAT scores, percent in the top of their high school classes), class sizes, retention rate

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Peer Assessment Score-
Columbia 4.6
Duke 4.5</p>

<p>Freshman Retention Rate:
Columbia 98%
Duke 97%</p>

<p>2005 Graduation Rate:
Columbia 94%
Duke 93%</p>

<p>% Classes with fewer than 20 students:
Columbia 72%
Duke 71%</p>

<p>Student Faculty Ratio:
Columbia: 7/1
Duke: 8/1</p>

<p>SAT Midrange:
Columbia 1340-1540
Duke 1360-1540</p>

<p>Freshman in top 10% of HS Class:
Columbia 92%
Duke 88%</p>

<p>Acceptance Rate:
Columbia 10%
Duke 21%</p>

<p>This information seems more inconclusive than anything. I will concede that I cannot prove numerically that Columbia is a better university than Duke. However, I doubt you can successfully argue that the opposite holds true either. They are both excellent schools and it is my opinion that Duke should not be ranked higher than Columbia. If anything, the information I've provided suggests equality.</p>

402

<p>“This information seems more inconclusive than anything.”</p>

<p>-This is exactly my point. I am saying that the rankings are what they are... </p>

<p>“However, I doubt you can successfully argue that the opposite holds true either.”</p>

<p>-I don’t know that I’m arguing for that. All I am saying that that the US News rank is not wildly off the mark if you accept its data. That is, it is not absurd for Duke to be ranked above Columbia when all the data that US News uses has them so closely matched- depending on the weighting of the data- the schools could shift in rank. </p>

<p>“They are both excellent schools and it is my opinion that Duke should not be ranked higher than Columbia.”</p>

<p>-Fair enough.</p>

403

<p>A lot of LAC's are underrated-Holy Cross, Bowdoin, Bucknell. Look at their alumni succes-HC has Nobel Prize grad, US Supreme Court, Senator, several Congressmen and many CEO's. HC and Bowdoin also enjoy alumni giving rates of 50% twice the rate of schools such as Georgetown.</p>

404

<p>"The quality of the material, huh? Yeah you’re right. I should think twice about the $50,000 I’m kicking out for this education annually. .... but hey, we can't all go to state-affiliated colleges."</p>

<p>no, we can't, Northwestern does get money from the state of illinois (as do the majority of universities out there), but the only difference is I get to reap the benefits with $10,000 more in my parents' pockets that will easily fund my romp around Europe this comming summer. Judging by the way you've presented some of your Northwestern educated arguments in this thread, you may want to think twice about that $50,000 ... but then again we can't all be so lucky. </p>

<p>"Ohh, do you kiss your mother with that mouth? There are children around; shame on you."</p>

<p>This is a college forum. If there are children on these boards I think they have larger problems in life than me pulling out a 3 letter word that starts with A and ends with an S and then another S. In fact, I'm even surprised that the CC auto-censor didn't catch that, that **** is nuts!</p>

405

<p>Your wit amazes me..... :rolleyes:</p>

406

<p>didn't US NEWS/Princeton Reivew list Oral Roberts as one of the top schools...sorry anyone thast puts that school on it top list loses a lot of credibility....one wonders how indeed the list is made up then...cc doesn't even list it</p>

407

<p>Like TourGuide said, this is arguing 'Rachel McAdams' and 'Jessica Alba'--neither Northwestern nor Cornell is the metaphorical 'Kathy Griffin.'</p>

<p>Well said.</p>

<p>Holy Christmas, can you guys grasp the concept that even simple things are usually inappropriate to judge with the precision with which you guys are expecting to rank colleges? If you tried to rank relatively simple things like running shoes, fast-food burgers, automobile tires, or which Tom Cruise movie sucks the least, you couldn't even come close to the precision in rankings you guys are tring to use to differentiate incredibly complex entities like these great universities from one another</p>

408

<p>Brand...looking at numbers...</p>

<p>Duke has more national merit scholars than Columbia, per capita.
Duke's SAT score is about 10-20 points higher than Columbia's (Collegeboard.com).
Duke has better feeding into top law/biz/med schools by proportion (Wall Street Journal).
Duke had slightly higher number of studentsi n the top 10% of their graduating class</p>

<p>Things like rankings judging PhD quality might say Columbia is better, but at undergrad student quality you'd be hard pressed to say Duke isn't better or equal to Columbia...and theres really no way you can say Columbia is better than Duke, at all. We are talking about how strong the undergrad's are. Also, Duke might have better alumni stats too. Dartmouth, Brown, Columbia, Duke, and Penn all fall into the same category for undergrad, with HYPSM above them.</p>

<p>And about Chicago being good as Duke (or even better, according to Brand)...
Duke students are stronger than Chicago students in every way at undergrad (top 10% of graduating class, SAT's, National Merit Scholars, feeding into top law/biz/med schools...). There's no way anyone can say Duke should be ranked below Chicago. Chicago is great for students wanting to go into doctoral programs in Econ and thats the only area I'd recommend Chicago's undergrad over Duke's. And for the non-quantitative stuff like atmosphere and social life, you can't possibly compare Chicago to Duke - Duke's got parties, great sports teams, a more active social life, and students just as smart/smarter than Chicago's on top of all that.</p>

<p>I'd like to see someone argue with the above. There is no data/numbers anywhere that would say Chicago undergrad is better than Duke's. The opposite is true in most cases. Just because Chicago is less fun doesn't make the kids more intelligent...that seems to be peoples train of thought, especially since Duke's social scene became scrutinized by the media due to the lax thing.</p>

409

<p>Well, I think it's strange that the university that best exemplifies what a university should be--and has the toughest academic programs, the most interesting faculty, and the most famous alumni--took ninth place in US News.</p>

410

<p>"Well, I think it's strange that the university that best exemplifies what a university should be--and has the toughest academic programs, the most interesting faculty, and the most famous alumni--took ninth place in US News."</p>

<p>-Harvard? It's number 2..... :rolleyes:</p>

<p>"Just because Chicago is less fun doesn't make the kids more intelligent...that seems to be peoples train of thought"</p>

<p>-:)</p>

411

<p>Whoever coined the maxim that academic arguments are so fierce because there is so little at stake, would have loved this thread.</p>

412

<p>It has been said many times, but post #256 hit the nail on the head again:</p>

<p>"Overrated: Schools I don't like/Can't get into/can't afford
Underrated: Schools I want to attend/now attend/ attended"</p>

<pre><code> :rolleyes:
</code></pre>

413

<p>Overrated: UCs, NYU, BU, HYPSM
Underrated: Duke, Conn, U Chicago, U of Michigan, JHU</p>

414

<p>"Your wit amazes me..... "</p>

<p>it is perhaps the only meaningful thing I get to exercize on threads like these. Even then, I wonder if it's worth my time. </p>

<p>"running shoes"
Nikes are by far the most popular, the most prestigious, and easily the most recognizable brand all over the world ... but I think the quality of shoe they provide for people is overrated. </p>

<p>"fast-food burgers"
Apples to apples, the BK standard issue cheeseburger is clearly superior to the McDonalds one. This is, of course, unless you compare specialty programs such as the Big Mac or the King Supreme where each fast food chain has their own specialty burgers. Getting into these burgers is also a little bit easier compared to the others ;)</p>

<p>"automobile tires"
The Michelin (sp?) AX173YA89 is clearly the winner here (and every one knows it). </p>

<p>"or which Tom Cruise movie sucks the least"
Rainman, though it tends to appeal to a certain type of audience. Some people say it's underrated, but I think it's more of a fit issue than anything.</p>

415

<p>New Balance (gotta love their range of sizes--doesn't matter how great the shoe is if it doesn't fit). FIT is more important than NAME-RECOGNITION or PRESTIGE. The man on the street might not appreciate New Balance, but those in the footwear industry sure do. But I do recognize that the Wall-Streeters in the NBA don't recruit much at the New Balance factory compared to what they do at the Nike factory. </p>

<p>I agree the basic BK cheesburger is a bargain (too much mustard though). McDonalds double cheese is decent and a good value at a buck. Still can't go wrong with the Big Mac.--great name recognition, but when it comes down to comparing it to the BK cheeseburger it's tough because they aren't really in the same category (national university vs. liberal arts college)</p>

<p>Tires: as long as it has a little tread left, who cares? Some people demand great cornering and treat it like a bigtime competitive varsity sport, while others don't care about this sport and just want to get where they are going (intramurals).</p>

<p>The only one I can sit through is "Jerry Maguire." Rainman had the pull of multiple MAJORS (Hoffman and Cruise), while JM had only one biggie (kinda like Stanford with multiple great fields vs. the smaller array at MIT). Rainman was also more serious and JM more preppy. JM also had more of a party atmosphere and had much more drinking.</p>

416

<p>Yep. Just to reiterate (because it needs to be said a few times on this ridiculous thread), this is basically a thread about how my daddy can beat up your daddy.</p>

<p>On the other hand, a link to this thread will demonstrate to a psychology class the basics of cognitive dissonance and post-decisional behavior.</p>

<p>Oh, and for those of you continuing to argue about this, it just MIGHT be a good idea to publish the criteria for what makes a school underrated or overrated. Then, you might actually have something to talk about that doesn't sound like babysitting hell.</p>

417

<p>
[quote]
Duke had slightly higher number of studentsi n the top 10% of their graduating class

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Which is due to the considerably larger class size. According to collegeboard.com, Duke's freshman class for 05 was 1724. Columbia's was 1024. With a difference that large, it is logical to assume they will have a higher number of students admitted that were in the top 10% of their high school class. However, on a percentage basis:</p>

<p>Duke 88%
Columbia 92%</p>

<p>So, no, that argument doesn't work. And I'm not sure I really buy the top 10% of graduating class argument anyways. I am well aware of a good deal of high schools where being "top 10%" really doesn't mean ****. </p>

<p>
[quote]
Duke's SAT score is about 10-20 points higher than Columbia's

[/quote]
</p>

<p>That's not a big enough difference to constitute a better school. Yale has a midrange of 700-790 V and 700-790 M. Princeton has a midrange of 680-770 V and 690-790 M. Does that mean Yale is a better university than Princeton as well? I hope you won't make that conclusion based on that data.</p>

<p>
[quote]
Duke has better feeding into top law/biz/med schools by proportion

[/quote]
</p>

<p>That WSJ report has been criticized regarding the criteria it used to compare the schools. I wouldn't take its findings as fact or the final word. Many of the universities didn't bother to argue with it, but there were complaints that it only examines one year of data as well as only a select few specific schools:</p>

<p>
[quote]
So for medicine, our schools were Columbia; Harvard; Johns Hopkins; the University of California, San Francisco; and Yale, while our MBA programs were Chicago; Dartmouth's Tuck School; Harvard; MIT's Sloan School; and Penn's Wharton School. In law, we looked at Chicago; Columbia; Harvard; Michigan; and Yale.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>The study is far too narrow. In the case of medical schools, it didn't take into account other fine programs such as UPenn, WUSTL, Duke, Stanford, UWashington, and Baylor - all of which are top 10 programs. For business, it failed to consider Stanford, Northwestern, Columbia, Berkeley, or UCLA - all of which are also top 10 programs. For law, it failed to look at Stanford, NYU, UPenn, Berkeley, or Virginia - all of which are, again, top 10 programs. </p>

<p>Without thoroughly researching each of these top schools as well, the data is, in my opinion, meaningless. The mere fact that Stanford is left out so often is a major negative aspect of the article.</p>

<p>
[quote]
We are talking about how strong the undergrad's are.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>I was actually comparing the universities as a whole. If we are comparing the universities as a whole, you will have a hard time arguing that Duke is a better university than Chicago or Columbia. Again, if anything, the schools should all be considered excellent universities in the same tier (as they are).</p>

418

<p>Underrated: All of those schools not located in the Northeast, particularly Northwestern, Rice, Emory, Vanderbilt, and Notre Dame. </p>

<p>Overrated: Obviously, those schools located in the Northeast, particularly the so-called lower tier of the Ivies (Cornell, Brown, and to a lesser extent Penn, Dartmouth, and Columbia). The student bodies and the faculties at these schools have nothing over my underrated schools except for a better Peer Assessment score that is heavily biased in favor of northeastern schools.</p>

419

<p>Underrated: UC Berkeley
Overrated: WashU St Louis</p>

420

<p>"The student bodies and the faculties at these schools have nothing over my underrated schools except for a better Peer Assessment score that is heavily biased in favor of northeastern schools."</p>

<p>So by your reasoning, college X located in rural upstate new york will certainly achieve a higher peer assessment score than college Y that is located in the middle of a large southern city with 4 million people - we can omit all of the details about endowment, recruitment, placement, reputation and all that BS, the location is really what makes or breaks a peer assessment score. </p>

<p>"Underrated: All of those schools not located in the Northeast, particularly Northwestern, Rice, Emory, Vanderbilt, and Notre Dame."</p>

<p>Northwestern and Rice are certainly considered to be among the best in the US, but Emory Vanderbuilt and ND aren't usually lumped in the same category when looking at other non eastern schools such as Stanford, CalTech, Berkeley, Duke and UChicago.</p>

<p>Your arguments sound based more on preference than on fact. If you disagree, please present your facts and numbers and we will be sure to listen.</p>

<p>"I agree the basic BK cheesburger is a bargain (too much mustard though). McDonalds double cheese is decent and a good value at a buck."</p>

<p>Again, preference should rule this decision. </p>

<p>"Still can't go wrong with the Big Mac.--great name recognition, but when it comes down to comparing it to the BK cheeseburger it's tough because they aren't really in the same category (national university vs. liberal arts college)"</p>

<p>As you said, lets compare apples to apples - the big mac should at least compete with the whopper. For a classic burger, the whopper should win this one, but the Big Mac is a classic in its own right but with a zesty twist and a delicious combination of cheese, meat, and russian-style sauce on a seeded bun. </p>

<p>Finally, some useful advice on CC (shocking!) - ordering a BK sandwich 2 ways ensures greater freshness than just the ones that have been sitting there:
1. Order it w/o something - they will make it fresh without pickles or onions or whatever you say.
2. Request 'off the broiler/fryer' - this is actually a request that will show up to the cashier on the computer. This means that the food preppers will actually put a fresh burger through the cooker and then right to your sandwich w/o the "middle man" burger holder where the meat could have been sitting for quite a while before somebody orders it.</p>