<p>overrated: Harvard</p>
<p>underrated: Syracuse</p>
<p>Underrated: San Diego State
acceptance rate is lower than the much heralded Cal Poly San Luis Obispo.</p>
<p>Cal Poly is a much better school, though.</p>
<p>Underrated-Holy Cross, Rice, William&Mary.</p>
<p>overrated: wustl, penn, duke, brown
slightly overrated: caltech (too lopsided with emphasis on maths/sciences)
underrated: uchicago, berkeley, northwestern
slightly underrated: stanford (as good as harvard to me)</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>How, may I ask, are HYPMS, ever underrated? That’s like saying that being “the best” isn’t good enough. -_-</p>
<p>i was strictly referring to usnews rankings. stanford should be tied with hyp.</p>
<p>^Maybe. But I don’t think most people see a significant difference between schools that are say, 1 or 4, or 7 or 8, or even within the top 10 or whatever.</p>
<p>underrated- Tufts, Davidson, William & Mary, Rice, Wake Forest, Georgetown.</p>
<p>overrated- most large research schools whose primary mission is graduate research. (Follow the money) That prestige lifts the undergrad image, when in reality undergrads are just an extra revenue source and there to fill football and basketball arenas. In fact they are thrilled if you stay an extra year or two b/c of the additional tuition payments.</p>
<p>^^^^Most overrated are schools who have strong students and relatively weak departments.</p>
<p>^^like most of the schools he listed?</p>
<p>“underrated- Tufts”</p>
<p>Any school that has a “syndrome” named after it cannot be that underrated.</p>
<p>Which is better?</p>
<p>1)Going to school with smart kids and have professors who want to teach or…</p>
<p>2)Going to schools with kids who didnt do as well in high school and have professors who are famous but dont want you to get in their way. Said professors spend most of their time with graduate students who did their undergrad work from choice number 1. </p>
<p>MMMmmmmmm…</p>
<p>“But I don’t think most people see a significant difference between schools that are say, 1 or 4, or 7 or 8, or even within the top 10 or whatever.”</p>
<p>Actually there is a significant difference between 4 and 8. After HYPSMC, we see a precipitous drop in quality and prestige.</p>
<p>Definitely number 2.</p>
<p>overrated: tcnj(by like 1m percent) and tufts</p>
<p>underrated: chicago and rice</p>
<p>By far the largest number of people getting their PhD’s come from the large research universities’ undergrad ranks so #2 is not even accurate. Most profs training PhD’s have only a handful of them–around 2-5–that they mentor. They have plenty time for interested serious undergrads too.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I love how you’re so pretentious in all your posts! 
</p>
<p>Yes, prestige drops, but insignificantly. And there is very little difference between a student who attends Columbia and one who attends Stanford.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>OMG!!! I have only just realized that Penn, Columbia, Chicago, and Duke have students who are, guess what, IDIOTS compared to the likes of students at HYPSMC! And their professors also absolutely SUCK because they obviously are MUCH WEAKER AT TEACHING UNDERGRADUATES than the professors at HYPSMC and have won NO AWARDS, and they have NO ENDOWMENTS to finance their students! And guess what? NO ONE IN THE COUNTRY HAS HEARD OF PENN, COLUMBIA, CHICAGO, AND DUKE, YET EVERYONE HAS HEARD OF CALTECH!!! So OBVIOUSLY, there MUST be a PRECIPITOUS drop of QUALITY and PRESTIGE between 4 and 8!</p>
<p>Seriously, what an ignorant post. Significant difference?</p>
<p>^^^^Finally a post that makes sense! Well, except for that last line…</p>