<p>Overrated: Berkeley
Underrated: Tufts</p>
<p>Overrated: Duke, NYU
Underrated: Claremont McKenna, Washington and Lee, Johns Hopkins, William and Mary</p>
<p>p.s. I will be attending UVa this fall, and I don’t really think it’s overrated or underrated…any thoughts?</p>
<p>A fine school with exceptionally intriguing history. Great location, good ROTC units, still getting over the delusion of being an all-male, “private” institution, especially for Virginians. Some really decent majors. All in all, my assessment, fwiw, is that its reputation is excellent and in toto, exceeds that which is deliverable.</p>
<p>Which leads to the issue of image, perception. Every college or university has a dramatic, significant lag in reality catching up to general reputations. Institutions are either getting stronger … or lesser. None stay the same. And this is the really “tricky” issue in all of this. Does one buy the perception … or the reality, even if it can be discerned? Does one want the sizzle or the steak? Conventional wisdom leads to a seemingly obvious answer … “Give me the beef!” Or the pork, or chicken, or tofu, or fish … or whatever it is we “think” we want and/or need.</p>
<p>Ironically, especially when we consider the potential/likelihood of real, substantial LEARNING and the imparting of real knowledge, for most students, the reputation is probably the preferred menu item since most are simply there to get the union card, not really expand their knowledge. And that is exactly what most are getting, I suspect. </p>
<p>There was a landmark study and report made on this back in the mid-80s, authored by Ken Mortimer, Alexander Astin and a bunch of higher ed eggheads. Their principle #1 notion was simply this … ENGAGED learning trumps the type of education the vast majority of students are receiving in their cheap, massified mega-versities. (Ironically, virtually all of these researchers were employed at those massified mega-versities that were paying and rewarding folks like them, i.e. those who explore and analyze what “good learning” is rather than providing such for their herds of cash-cow students.)</p>
<p>So, if one is a virtual unscholarly scholar, go for the latent, lofty reputation with fluffy, passive, massive instruction. Go to Penn State, Michigan, Wisconsin, etc. If real learning is desirable, other options might be preferable.</p>
<p>The student’s ideal objective (or at least his/her parents’!) should be to attend a school that has sizzle and is a real meal. Style and substance. </p>
<p>And that SHOULD be any institution’s similar desires. But that is far easier said than done in one of the world’s most competitive road races.</p>
<p>But all this leads to a new, different if related concept … VALUE. Ah, for another day’s navel gazing …</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>My sisters attended privates and I knew for a fact that type of environment wasn’t conducive for my learning. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>What’s so wrong with these schools? I understand Penn State to a degree, unless you’re in their Honors College, but Michigan and Wisconsin are solid, reputable state schools. There are serious academic scholars there. I’m one of them. There are more of me who are smarter, more acute at my university and at other state flagships.</p>
<p>“So, if one is a virtual unscholarly scholar, go for the latent, lofty reputation with fluffy, passive, massive instruction. Go to Penn State, Michigan, Wisconsin, etc. If real learning is desirable, other options might be preferable.”</p>
<p>You honestly think that UVA is that much better than Michigan or Wisconsin? Please enlighten me with your wisdom. I have already read your thoughts and contempt for PSU in another thread.</p>
<p>Whistle Pig, are you saying “real learning” is not found at any of your mentioned schools? U of Michigan, really? And I live in Pennsylvania and think that Penn State does not get the credit it deserves as it often gets shadowed by it’s party scene.
And I don’t know much about Wisconsin but would you care to explain how you think these credible state schools don’t foster “real learning”…?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Wait, you’re saying that Midwesterners overrate their state schools? Well duh. So do people in California. So do people in Florida who think U of F is the bee knees. So do people in Texas. I haven’t met even a handful of people who think any Big 10 (except Northwestern students) or any Great Plain/Midwest state school is on par, academically overall, with top LACs or Ivies. I haven’t met one Minnesota Gopher who thought their university was better (better for them maybe) than the most pimped out universities on either coasts, except for UCLA and some select schools that aren’t Ivies.</p>
<p>On location: Um, a lot. Besides those who are familiar with college reputation, the general America and the world are less familiar with universities in the Midwest. If you ask the average Joe if they know NYU or Northwestern or UChicago, more than likely they’ll say NYU. If ask a foreigner to name an LAC more than likely they’ll name an LAC on either coast with an answer leaning towards the east coast. It’s marketing, and the coasts get more of that then central USA. If you think otherwise you better hand in that Duke diploma.</p>
<p>I think you confuse pride for ones university for elitism. If anything, it would be out of character for a Midwesterner to not be self depreciating, so I caught you there. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I would like to see survey data that proves this. Not your close encounters.</p>
<p>Most Overrated: NYU
(I can speak personally to me and my friends going NYU CRAZY as juniors but when you get over the hype it’s actually a pretty crap school, all things considered.)</p>
<p>Most Underrated: Emory
(I live in GA and I know people that go to, have attended, and professors that teach at, Emory. And WOW. These kids are SET. Fantastic school, any of the kids applying to the elite schools sort of overlook Emory but are really missing out.)</p>
<p>I wonder what posters to this thread really mean when they say a college is overrated or underrated. Are we talking about the USNWR ratings? If so, then unless you believe US News is badly applying its own criteria (making errors or deliberately falsifying data), every school is pretty much rightly rated. </p>
<p>To make a principled, objective argument (on some basis other than factual errors or fraud), I think you need to propose different criteria or weights. You could say for example that the criteria should include some measure for research expenditures or faculty research productivity. Some other rankings do include such measurements. These would tend to drive up many state universities in the national university rankings. Washington Monthly does use “research” as one of 3 major components; it ranks UC Berkeley as the top national university. Or, you could say that the USNWR criteria are fine except for the subjective PA scores, so take them out. Then you might wind up with something more like the stateuniversity.com rankings, which place MIT first, Harvard 38th, and UC Berkeley 140th.</p>
<p>hahmed, MidwestPride … (gotta say, both handles expose or at least suggest precisely the responses offered …;)) But … all I’m saying is the report was right. These places have lots of brain power that is essentially rewarded for doing research. Good teaching is rarely, consistently, completely honored and rewarded as such. But even if it were, there is no way good teachers can be good teachers the way most places structure too many classes. Essentially the masses (not the anecdotes) are experiencing way too much passive learning vs. engaged, interactive instruction and learning. That’s it … UM, UW, PSU, OSU, and all the rest of the megaversities are a monumental rip-off diploma factories. Yea, lots of chest pounding goes on about them … simply because there are lots of chest pounders graduating from these places. It’s an awful system, that a whole bunch of people are paying a whole lot of money. And it’s a hard pill to swallow for those pounders.</p>
<p>Therefore: UVA is also a megauniversity=rip-off diploma factory. </p>
<p>Btw here is a study done by USNWR that disagrees with your bomabastic views:</p>
<p>[Best</a> Undergraduate Teaching | Rankings | Top National Universities | US News](<a href=“http://colleges.usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/best-colleges/rankings/national-universities/undergraduate-teaching]Best”>http://colleges.usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/best-colleges/rankings/national-universities/undergraduate-teaching)</p>
<p>Please notice that The University of Michigan is ranked right up there with UVA.</p>
<p>@ Whistle Pig, goodness. You call standing up for state universities as chest pounding? Now when pigs fly I’ll believe you. I’m not going sit and take your tongue and cheek, let alone condescending tone, lightly. And what’s up with the run-on sentences? I to read it twice to make any sense of it.</p>
<p><a href=“gotta%20say,%20both%20handles%20expose%20or%20at%20least%20suggest%20precisely%20the%20responses%20offered%20…”>quote</a>
[/quote]
</p>
<p>What do you mean by this?</p>
<p>He is obviously masking his ■■■■■■■■ with verbosity, and he got all of you…</p>
<p>Underrated: Colby College
Overrated: Boston College</p>
<p>Sent from my iPhone using CC</p>
<p>notaninjunear, MP … Pm me and I’ll explain whatever you might be struggling with. No condescension intended. Like both of you, I suspect, I’m a victim of a mediocre education. Diligent lifelong learning however does allow for overcoming our handicaps. Give it a go. Happy to provide reading list.</p>
<p>Isn’t it interesting when intellectual challenge, non-4 letter language, or inability to discuss or rebut in a reasonable, logical way presents itself, the messenger becomes the “■■■■■” or the big bad ogre. It’s predictable. </p>
<p>Check it out. “Involvement in Learning.” I’m happy to read it to you, as necessary.</p>
<p>“Isn’t it interesting when intellectual challenge, non-4 letter language, or inability to discuss or rebut in a reasonable, logical way presents itself, the messenger becomes the “■■■■■” or the big bad ogre.”</p>
<p>No comment necessary.</p>
<p>wait…Whistle Pig, the way you phrased that, you sound like you’re saying you are the one with the inability to discuss or rebut in a reasonable, logical way and are being called a ■■■■■. It probably isn’t what you meant, but it’s definitely how that sentence came out. Your sentences are so convoluted that it’s kind of hard to take you seriously.</p>
<p>The fact that everyone believes Wash U to be entirely overrated obviously demonstrates how underrated it is. Q.E.D.</p>
<p>reesespiecez … is it reasonable to assume you are not an English major @ Carleton?
</p>
<p>rjkofnovi … but in any case you couldn’t resist, right? 
:p</p>
<p>Overrated: Wash U and Brown</p>
<p>Underrated: Carleton College (Great LAC with strong science programs)</p>